a ead 
3 
I “ab aha! 
{ 
rie NN) 
. 
5 


“- 
al 
wr 
= 
- “ 
- 
a 


mor 
oe ere 
ao 


IH 
nn 
i 


PETER EL 
qtaaaees a8 
ii 
ARGSESRS eR 
iN Sal) 
i 


TAL 
14) 
ttf 
HTH 
AN 
i 


| 
i 
i 


Halll 

/ za\h 

ANY, Af M44 } 
1 4H 


PEPEE EEE 
PEER TELE 
Leet Pa 


REURGERSR ERATE 
SPREE ERESEEE: 
ay 


fe A 
3 ii 








hs. ug 
mas) one 
a 


Phe: 





. 

4 

x 
hes 


t 
N 
+ 





~*~ 


a ~‘< bs ‘ ms ha 
In ernet Archive 





* 


https /larchive.org/details/inquiryintoconst00king 


= 
‘ Sa dl ' ‘a ¥ 
4 se Ap 
i, ¢ = cz te. . Re i | ae 
 — = a? ee a Se « 





AN INQUIRY 


> 
INTO THE 


CONSTITUTION, DISCIPLINE, UNITY, AND 
WORSHIP, 


PRIMITIVE CHURCH, 


THAT FLOURISHED WITHIN THE FIRST THREE HUNDRED YEARS 
AFTER CHRIST. 


FAITHFULLY COLLECTED OUT OF 


. 


THE FATHERS AND EXTANT WRITINGS OF THOSE AGES. 


By PETER KING, 


LORD HIGH CHANCELLOR OF ENGLAND. 


WITH AN INTRODUCTION BY THE AMERICAN EDITOR. 


NEW-YORK: 


PUBLISHED BY G. LANE & P. P. SANDFORD, 


FOR THE METHODIST EPISCOPAL CHURCH, AT THE CONFERENCE OFFICE, 
200 MULBERRY-STREET. 


J. Collord, Printer. 
1841, 


nein 
tee 


s 


FS is 


AB :: pe a eek : 


ms, ry ‘pipe 
- » me maf a M: ‘ 


Set 6 
& 


















by. = eon 
Se a 


he 









eRe 08 
shea i 7 i . 











. = 2 tats Sh rahi MeN 
> : ea 3 a, a. oP } . 
tay me ny - ty  eeerecree ’ 
alee tag it SL RGE ei sicd: RS « 
ie | sg poe es Pale reese or! Pay 
re reat Jat Me re yi we 
y ’; ne <% uk ae ae area: eae 
; Runde anita mae | 
OK ion , A leatet ag lhe lapel cus 
Rees heap 3 MG Oe ft 
mee: ee ss aes Gas aa pe! cs 





et 


~ 


» ‘ 
s. * - 






s Py 
Ve 
yy yey 
K dA Al YU AD AAI 









Ge). 7 





Tue volume now presented to the public in a new 
dress has been considered by many of the most learned 
divines not only as a rare exhibition of patient and im- 
partial investigation, but, in its leading facts, a true re- 
presentation of the government and usages of the primitive 
church. But it is rendered especially interesting to the 
Methodists as the instrument of breaking down the high 
church prejudices of Mr. John Wesley, and so of prepar- 
ing the way for the distinct organization of the Methodist 
Episcopal Church in the United States. 

In his Journal for January 20, 1746, Mr. Wesley says, 
“JT set out for Bristol. On the road I read over Lord 
King’s account of the primitive church. In spite of the 
vehement prejudice of my education, I was ready to be- 
lieve that his was a fair and impartial draught; but if. so, 
it would follow that bishops and presbyters are (essen- 
tially) of one order; and that, originally, every Christian 
congregation was a church independent on all others.” 

Thirty-eight years after the above was written, in his 
letter “ to Dr. Coke, Mr. Asbury, and the brethren in North 
America,” dated Bristol, September 10, 1784, Mr. Wes- 
ley says, “ Lord King’s account of the primitive church 
convinced me, many years ago, that bishops and presby- 
ters are the same order, and consequently have the same 
right to ordain. For many years I have been importuned 
from time to time to exercise this right, by ordaining part 
of our travelling preachers. But I have still refused, not 
only for peace’ sake, but because I was determined, as little 


4 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


as possible, to violate the established order of the national 
Church to which I belonged.” 

Our venerated founder was thoroughly read in the his- 
tory and monuments of the primitive church, and perfectly 
intimate with the writings of the fathers, upon which the 
conclusions of Lord King are founded. And that such a 
mind—one so well stored with classical learning and the 
records of antiquity—should be so affected by a perusal of 
this book, is certainly nota little in favour both of its facts 
and reasoning. 

It must however be borne in mind, that Mr. Wesley 
ealled no man father, upon earth; and in several instances, 
in the organization of the connection, he departed from 
what Lord King supposes the primitive practice. In one 
point, (and that is a very important one,) Mr. Wesley’s 
system is more strictly apostolic than the draught of the 
“Primitive Church” by our author. We refer to the 
connectional principle, acting through a general itinerant 
superintendency. Upon this point our author is not so 
satisfactory, and incautious readers need to be put on 
their guard. 

When he asserts that there was “but one bishop in a 
church,” his meaning must be restricted to those primitive 
churches or congregations in populous places which as- 
sembled in “ one place.” ‘These churches expanded until 
it became necessary to divide and subdivide them, and so 
the appropriate officers were multiplied to meet the emer- 
gency. There were certainly several emcxomoi, bishops, in 
the church of Ephesus in the apostles days. (See Acts xx, 
17,28.) Bishops in primitive times were properly pastors ; 
and as their age or eminent holiness entitled them to more 
than ordinary respect, for the edification of the body they 
were by general consent invested with a jurisdiction over 
the ordinary pastors and their flocks ; but this did not con- 
stitute them a different order from that of presbyters. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 5 


The following question and answer, taken from the 
Minutes of the conference of 1745, will present this sub- 
ject in its proper light, and clearly show Mr. Wesley’s 
views. 

“ Quest. Is Episcopal, Presbyterian, or Independent 
church government most agreeable to reason? Ans. The 
plain origin of church government seems to be this :— 
Christ sends forth a person to preach the gospel: some 
of those who hear him, repent and believe in Christ: they 
then desire him to watch over them, to build them up in 
faith, and to guide their souls into paths of righteousness. 
Here, then, is an independent congregation, subject to no 
pastor but their own; neither liable to be controlled, in 
things spiritual, by any other man or body of men what- 
soever. But soon after some from other parts, who were 
occasionally present while he was speaking in the name 
of the Lord, beseech him to come over and help them also. 
He complies, yet not till he confers with the wisest and 
holiest of his congregation ; and, with their consent, ap- 
points one who has gifts and grace to watch over his 
flock in his absence. If it please God to raise another 
flock in the new place before he leaves them, he does the 
same thing, appointing one whom God hath fitted for the 
work to watch over these souls also. In like manner, in 
every place where it pleases God to gather a little flock 
by his word, he appoints one, in his absence, to take the 
oversight of the rest, to assist them as of the ability which 
God giveth. 

“These are deacons, or servants of the church; and 
they look upon their first pastor as the common father of 
all these congregations, and regard him in the same light, 
and esteem him still as the shepherd of their souls. These 
congregations are not strictly independent, as they depend 
upon one pastor, though not upon each other. 

“ As these congregations increase, and the deacons grow 


6 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


in years and grace, they need other subordinate deacons, 
or helpers, in respect of whom they may be called pres- 
byters or elders, as their father in the Lord may be called 
the bishop or overseer of them all.” 

To this we add the following view presented by Dr. 
Stillingfleet :-— 

“When there was but one congregation in a church, it 
was necessary, if it had any church power, that it must 
be lodged in that one congregation: but when this con- 
gregation was multiplied into many more, is it not as ne- 
cessary, for their mutual government, there should be a 
common power governing them together as a jomt society? 
Besides, the first congregational church in the New Tes- 
tament, viz., that of Jerusalem, could be no particular or- 
ganical church; for it had many, if not all, universal offi- 
cers in it; andif they were the fixed pastors of that church, 
they could not, according to the principles of those who 
thus speak, preach to any other congregation but their own, 
by virtue of their office: and so, either their apostolical 
office and commission must be destroyed, if they were 
pastors of particular organical churches ; or, if their apos- 
tolical office be asserted, their pastorship of particular 
organical churches is destroyed by their own principles, 
who assert that the pastor of a church can do no pastoral 
office out of his own congregation. The case isthe same 
as to other churches planted by the apostles, and governed 
by themselves ; which two, as far as I can find in the New 
Testament, were of an equal extent; viz., that all the 
churches planted by apostles were chiefly governed by 
themselves, though they had subordinate officers under 
them. These first churches then were not such particular 
organized churches, but they were as the first matter of 
many congregations to be propagated out of them; which 
after made one society, consisting of those several con- 
gregations embodied together, and ruled by one common 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 4 


government. Asin acollege every tutor hath his own pu- 
pils, which he rules; and if we suppose but one tutor at first 
in the college, with his pupils, all the power both common 
to the society, and peculiar to his flock, is joined together ; 
but when there are many more tutors, having pupils under 
their charge, all these, for their better orderimg as a so- 
ciety, must be governed by the common government of the 
college, to which the particular government of every tutor 
is and must be subordinate: but this will be more fully 
made appear in the original of civil government. It is far 
more evident that all civil power lay at first in Adam and 
his family, and afterward in particular families, than that 
all church power lay in particular congregations at first. 
We may then with as good reason say, that there is no 
lawful civil government now, but that of particular fami- 
lies; and that no national government hath any right or 
power over particular families, because families had once 
all civil power within themselves; as because it is sup- 
posed that all church power lay first in particular congre- 
gations, therefore there must be no church power above 
them ; nor that particular congregations are subject to such 
government as is requisite for the regulating of the society 
in common, as comprehending in it many particular con- 
gregations. Let them show, then, how any government 
in the state is lawful, when families had the first power, 
and by what right now those families are subordinate to 
the civil magistrate, and what necessity there is for it; 
and by the very same reasons will we show the lawfulness 
of government in the church over many congregations, 
and that those are by the same right, and upon the same 
necessity, to subordinate themselves to the governors of 
the church, considered as a society taking in many parti- 
cular congregations.”—Jrenicum, pp. 129, 130. 

The truth is, that the details of church government are 
not specifically defined in the word of God, but are left 


8 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


to be supplied by the wisdom of the church. Certain 
general principles are there laid down, under which there 
is room for some variety. Perfect uniformity in all respects 
did not obtain in the primitive church, and of course the 
reader must not expect to find the circumstantials all 
settled in this work. Indeed no pattern, however ancient, 
can be of divine authority unless it can be clearly deduced 
from the Scriptures. But the divine right of episcopacy, 
as an order superior to the presbytery, is wholly without 
sanction either from Scripture or primitive practice. 

We are aware that it is alleged that Lord King’s 
draught of the “ Primitive Church” was published in the 
author’s youthful days, and that he probably outlived the 
hasty conclusions of his early years. ‘The same is said 
of Stillingfleet’s Irenicum. But let it be understood that 
we have little to do with the authors of these works: our 
business is with their arguments. Whether these dis- 
tinguished individuals ever recanted these works, is a 
matter into which we are not disposed to inquire. That 
the works which survive them contain arguments which, 
however they may have been recanted, have never been 
refuted, we are quite certain. 

In this edition we have strictly followed the original, 
except in the orthography of some words, and have in- 
serted a sketch of the author’s life from a late London 
edition, printed by S. Cornish § Co. We have retained 
all the original references, and hope they will be found 
accurate. 

The present being, as far as we are advised, the first 
American edition of this work, and uniting the excellences 
of both the ancient and the modern editions, it is to be 
hoped that it may greatly serve the interests of truth, 
and be highly acceptable to the public. 


GerorGE Peck, Epiror. 
New-York, April 14, 1841. 


LIFE OF THE AUTHOR. 


— 


THE subject of the present memoir, so famous for his 
ecclesiastical learning, as well as for his knowledge in 
the law, was born at Exeter, in Devonshire, 1669. His 
father was an eminent merchant in that city; and, though 
a man of considerable property, and descended from a 
good family, determined to bring up his son to his own 
trade. With this view he took him into his business, and 
kept him at his shop for some years: however, the son’s 
inclination being stréngly bent to learning, he took all 
opportunities of gratifying his passion, laying out all the 
money he could spare in books, and devoting every mo- 
ment of his leisure hours to study ; so that he became, in 
reality, an excellent scholar before the world suspected 
any thing of the matter. His acquaintance with the cele- 
brated Mr. Locke, who was his uncle by his mother’s 
side, and who left him half his library at his death, was 
of vast advantage to him. ‘That gentleman, being greatly 
surprised and pleased with the prodigious advances which 
his nephew had made in literature, advised him to go and 
perfect himself at Leyden: and it is said to have been by 
his advice that Mr. King afterward entered himself a stu- 
dent at the Inner Temple, and applied himself to the law, 
in which profession his great parts and indefatigable in- 
dustry, for he was remarkable for both, soon made him 
famous. 

In the mean time he gave a proof of uncommon learning 
by publishing, when he was no more than twenty-two 

1* 


10 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


years of age, the first part of a work entitled, “ An In- 
quiry into the Constitution, Discipline, Unity, and Wor- 
ship of the Primitive Church, which flourished within 
the first three hundred Years after Christ, faithfully col- 
lected out of the extant Writings of those Ages,” 1691, 
8vo. In this work the author has abundantly shown that 
spirit of peace, unity, and moderation, which he recom- 
mends in so powerful a manner to all parties. He after- 
ward published the second part of the “ Inquiry into the 
Constitution,” &c.* Having desired, in his preface, with 
a true air of modesty and candour, to be shown, either 
publicly or privately, any errors or wrong conclusions 
which he might have fallen into, that request was first 
complied with by Mr. Edmund Elys, 1692; and after- 
ward by Mr. W. Slater, a non-juring divine, 1717. 

Mr. King had not been many years at the Temple when 
he had acquired as high a reputation in law, as he had 
before done for his knowledge in divinity; so that, in 
1699, he obtained a seat in the house of commons as 
representative for the borough of Beer-Alston in Devon- 
shire; and the same honour was continued to him not 
only in the ensuing, which was the last parliament of 
King William, but also in the five succeeding parliaments 
of Queen Anne. In the mean time, as if unwilling to quit 
his old pursuits, the more beloved, perhaps, for having 
been the first, he completed some collections he had 
already made from ecclesiastical antiquity, and having 
digested them into proper order, and made also proper 
remarks upon them, he published them in 1702, 8vo., under 
the title of “The History of the Apostles’ Creed, with 
Critical Observations on its several Articles.” This, as 
well as the former work, was written with surprising 
judgment and learning; and Peter de Coste, who sent an 


* Both parts are included in the present volume. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 11 


abstract of it in French to Bernard, to be published, as it 
accordingly was, in his “ Nouvelles de la République des 
Lettres,” for November and December, 1702, has related 
a very remarkable particular concerning it. He tells us 
that “an English prelate, distinguished for his erudition— 
being persuaded it could hardly be any thing better than 
a wretched rhapsody out of several discourses on the sub- 
ject before printed, and especially Pearson’s ‘ Exposition 
of the Creed,’ who seemed to have exhausted that matter— 
took it up, and began to read it with this unfavourable 
prepossession: but that he was quickly convinced of his 
mistake, and surprised to find in it so many curious things 
not to be met with in Pearson, without perceiving any 
thing borrowed from that writer.” 

Henceforward our author found himself under a neces- 
sity of dropping all further pursuits in this way. The 
great business which his abilities as a lawyer brought into 
his hands, left him no time to spare; and in a few years 
his merit in the law was distinguished by the highest 
honours. July, 1708, he was chosen recorder of London, 
and knighted by Queen Anne in the September following. 
1709 he was appointed one of the managers of the house 
of commons, at the trial of Sacheverell. Upon the acces- 
sion of George I. he was appointed lord chief justice of 
the court of common pleas, and soon after sworn of the 
privy council. He was created a peer May the 25th, 
1725, by the title of Lord King, baron of Ockham, in 
Surrey ; and the great seal, being taken from Lord Mac- 
clesfield, was delivered to him the first of June following. 
The extraordinary pains he took in the discharge of his 
office by degrees impaired his constitution, and brought 
upon him at last a paralytic disorder; this distemper in- 
creasing, he resigned the seals the 26th of November, 
1733, and his life July the 22nd following. He died at 
his seat at Ockham, leaving behind him four sons, two 


12 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


daughters, and a widow, the daughter of Richard Seys, 
Esq., of Boverton, in Glamorganshire. The motto under 
his coat of arms is “ Labor ipse Voluptas,” which has 
been thought to be chosen by him with great propriety, as 
being the characteristic quality of his nature. 

Mr. Orme in his “ Bibliotheca Biblica,” speaking of our 
author and his works, observes, “ Mr. Locke, who was 
Lord King’s uncle, left him one half of his library, and he 
evidently inherited a large portion of the penetration and 
liberality of mind, as well as of the books, of the philoso- 
pher. Few authors are more worthy of being consulted; 
the original authorities are always quoted, and great can- 
dour and liberality are invariably displayed. His works 
contain a large portion of valuable and accurate learning.” 


PREFACE. 


Tue design of the following treatise is, in general, to 
represent the constitution, discipline, unity, and worship 
of the primitive church, that flourished within the first 
three hundred years after Christ; but more particularly 
and especially to describe their opinions and practices 
with respect to those things that are now unhappily con- 
troverted between those of these kingdoms who are com- 
monly known by the names of Church of England men, 
Presbyterians, Independents, and Anabaptists ; for which 
reason it comes to pass, that to those points concerning 
which there is no difference among us, I have not spoken 
so largely as otherwise I might have done; and some 
other customs of theirs I have not mentioned at all, be- 
cause now neglected and disused by us. 

What I have written as to this subject I have wholly 
collected out of the genuine and unquestionably authentic 
writings of those ages, that are now extant, making use 
of no other writings whatever, except the ecclesiastical 
history of Eusebius, which was written in the beginning 
of the fourth age, and relates only those affairs that were 
transacted in the three former ; beyond the period of which 
time this inquiry doth not reach, but is wholly limited 
thereby, and confined thereunto. ‘That which has been 
thus collected, has been done, I hope, with the greatest 
impartiality and fidelity, without any prepossession of 
mind, or any fraudulent dealing whatsoever, which the 
reader may the sooner believe, and the easier be convinced 


14 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


of, since, for the clearer demonstration of my faithfulness 
and unprejudicedness herein, I have taken care to print in 
the margin the original words of all, the passages that I 
have cited, at least of allthat are necessary, together with 
the very pages whence I fetched them, that so the reader, 
turning to the pages mentioned in those editions that I 
use, (which editions I shall set down at the end of this 
preface,) and finding it according to my quotations, may 
the more readily be persuaded that throughout this whole 
tract I have been every way honest and unbiassed. 

And as I have faithfully and impartially collected these 
observations, so I have as modestly and unconcernedly 
represented them, avoiding all words or speeches that 
might seem to carry the least sharpness or reflection in 
them, but have nakedly expressed them, declining all 
affected or pompous expressions, contenting myself with 
those terms that most naturally serve to render the truth 
more perspicuous and evident, according to the observa- 
tion of Clemens Alexandrinus, “ He that would deliver 
the truth, ought not studiously to affect an elegancy of 
expression, but only to use such words whereby he may 
render what he means intelligible.”* 

Whether all, or some, or none, of the following primi- 
tive customs may be changed by the civil magistrate, or 
by a convocational assembly, I pretend not here to handle ; 
my design at present is only to search into matter of 
fact, to find out what were the usages of the ancient 
church within the first three hundred years after Christ ; 
for, as was said before, no lower do I intend to go; which, 
after the most impartial and serious inquiry, I find to be 
according to the ensuing treatise, in the penning whereof 


* Aer tov GAnbeiac Knddmevov &x && EriBobAnc Kai dpovtidog tHv 
dpdow ovvbeiva, reppaotar de dvoudlery povov wc dbvatat, 6 Bsie- 
Tat, Stromat. lib. 2, p. 263. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 15 


I have avoided all prolixity and tediousness, and for that 
end omitting to answer several objections that I know may 
be made against several things which I have here assert- 
ed; my intention being briefly and perspicuously to prove 
what I judge to be the true practice of the primitive church 
as to those points now disputed by us. 

As for the occasion of my publishing this treatise, it 
cannot be imagined to proceed from a spirit of vanity or 
ambition, since I so far conceal my name as that even my 
bookseller knows not who I am; much less, I hope, will 
it be construed by any to proceed from a spirit of conten- 
tion and animosity, from an ill design to foment and in- 
crease our present feuds and divisions; since, I assure 
the whole world, our unnatural quarrels do so much afflict 
and trouble me, as that I would sacrifice not only this 
book, but also all that I either am or have, if thereby I 
might be a happy instrument to compose and heal them. 
But among other reasons these two were the chiefest that 
swayed me hereunto,—to inform others ; and to inform 
myself: to inform others what the practices of the prim- 
itive apostolic churches were, if any shall be inquisitive 
and desirous to know them; or, if I am mistaken, (as who 
is without his errors?) to be better informed myself: 
which, I must needs confess, was that which I chiefly 
designed in the publication hereof: wherefore without 
any ostentation or challenging, but unfeignedly and sin- 
cerely to prevent mistakes in my younger years, I humbly 
desire, (if the request be not too bold,) and shall heartily 
thank any learned person that will be so kind as to inform 
me if he knows me to have erred in any one or more par- 
ticulars, which he may do, either publicly, or, if he think 
fit, privately, by letter to my bookseller ; who will convey 
it safely to my hands: and if any one that finds me de- 
ceived in any one or more points will favour me so far as 
to undertake such a trouble, I should desire these few 


e 


16 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


things of him: that he would be pleased, as I have done, 
to use only those writings that were composed within my 
prescribed time, and, if possible, the same editions; and 
not only to form objections against what I have written, 
but also to answer, or rather to give me another sense of 
those passages which I have cited; and then I promise, 
if my mistakes are fairly shown, I will not pertinaciously 
and obstinately defend them, but most willingly and thank- 
* fully renounce them, since my design is not to defend a 
party, but to search out the truth. 

I have butone thing more to add in this preface, and that 
is, that when I first resolved on the printing of this trea- 
tise, 1 designed to have published my observations on the 
fourth general head propounded in the title-page to be in- 
quired into, viz., ‘the worship of the primitive church,” 
as well as now I have done those on the three former, 
but for some reasons I have reserved this for a particular 
tract by itself; which probably, though I do not absolutely 
promise it, may in a little time more be also published; and 
that the rather, because in this part | have made two or three 
references thereunto, which I thought good to acquaint the 
reader with, that so, if he cannot find some things that I 
have referred to in this treatise, he may be assured they 
are to be met with in the ensuing one.* 


* The “Observations on the Worship of the Primitive Church,” 
above spoken of, forms Part II. of the present volume. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 17 


The primitive authors mentioned in this treatise, together 
with those editions that I have made use of, are as fol- 
lows :— 


S. Ignatii Epistole Greco-Latin. Quarto edit., [saaci 
Vossil. Amstelodam, 1646. 

S. Barnabe Epistola Catholica, edit. ad Calcem S. Ig- 
natii, quarto. Amstelodam, 1646. 

S. Clementis Romani Epistole Greco-Latin. Quarto 
edit. Patricii Junii. Oxonii, 1633. 

S. Irenzi Opera, folio edit., Nic. Galasii, Geneve, 1580. 

S. Justini Martyris Opera Greco-Latin. Folio. Co- 
loniz, 1686. 

Epistola Plinii Secundi Trajano Imperatori de Christi- 
anis in fronte Operum Justin. Martyr. Colon., 1616. 

Clementis Alexandrini Opera, folio edit., Heinsii. Lug. 
Batav., 1616. 

Tertulliani Opera, folio edit. Paris., 1580. 

Novatiani de Trinitate et de Cibis Judaicis inter Opera 
Tertulliani. Edit. Paris., 1580. 

Cypriani Opera, folio edit., Sim. Goulart. apud Johan. le 
Preux. 1593. 

Vita Cypriani per Pontium ejus Diaconum. In fronte 
Oper. Cyprian. Edit. Goulart. 1593. 

Fragmentum Victorini Petavionensis, de Fabrica Mun- 
di, pages 103,104. Histor. literar. Dr. S. Cave, edit. fol. 
Londini, 1688. 

Minucii Felicis Octavius edit. ad Calcem Tertullian. 
Apolog. per Desiderium Heraldum, quarto. Paris., 1613. 

Origenis Commentaria Omnia que Greece Reperiuntur, 
edit. de Huetii., 2 vols. folio. Rothomagi. 1668. 

Origenis contra Celsum, Libri Octo, et ejusdem Philo- 
calia Greco-Latin. edit. quarto, per Gulielm. Spencer. 
Cantabrigie, 1677. 


18 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


Origenis epi edyjc, seu, de Oratione, Greco-Latin. 
Octavo. Oxonii, 1685. 

As for those other works of Origen which are extant 
only in Latin, I have made no use at all of those of Ruf- 
fin’s translation, except his Creed, since in them we know 
not which we read, whether Origen or Ruffin; and as for 
those which were translated by more faithful hands, I have 
used the editions of Merlin or Erasmus, without nominat- 
ing the page. 

Eusebii Pamphili Ecclesiastica Historia Greco-Latin. 
Folio edit. Henric. Vales. Paris., 1659. I have read 
only the seven first books of Eusebius’s history, because 
the three others go beyond my limited time. 

As for the writings of S. Gregory of Neocesarea, they 
are but few, and from thence I have taken nothing but his 
Creed, so that there is no need to mention any edition of 
his works. The same I may say also of the short epistle 
of Polycarp, which I have cited but once, and therein 
have used the version of Dr. Cave, extant in his Apostol- 
ici, page 127. 

There are yet some other fathers whose remaining 
tracts I have read, as Theophilus Antiochenus, Athena- 
goras, &c., who are not cited in this treatise, because I 
have found nothing in them pertinent to my design. 


AN INQUIRY, ETC. 


CHAPTER I. 


§ 1. The various significations of the word church. § 2. A particular 
church the chief subject of the ensuing discourse: the constituent 
parts thereof twofold, viz., clergy and laity. § 3. Each of these had 
their particular functions, and both their joint offices: three things on 
which a great part of the following discourse depends proposed to be 
handled, viz., the peculiar acts of the clergy, the peculiar acts of the 
laity, and the joint acts of them both. §4. The peculiar acts of the 
clergy propounded to be discussed according to their several orders : 
first, of the bishops: a view of the world as it was in a state of hea- 
thenism, at the first preaching of Christianity, necessary to be con- 
sidered : where the apostles planted churches, they appointed the first 
converts to be bishops thereof. § 5. But one bishop in a church: 
the orthodoxness of the faith proved from the succession of the 
bishops: the titles and relation of the bishop to his flock. 


§ 1. THar we may give the more clear and distinct 
answer to this important query, it is necessary that we first 
examine the primitive notion of the word church, upon the 
due apprehension of which depends the right understand- 
ing of a great part of our following discourse. 

This word church, as in our modern acceptation, so also 
in the writings of the fathers, is equivocal, having different 
significations, according to the different subjects to which 
it is applied. I shall not here concern myself about the 
derivation of the word, or its original use among the hea- 
thens, from whom it was translated into the Christian 
church ; but only take notice of its various uses among 
the ancient Christians, which were many, as, 


20 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


I. It is very often to be understood of the church uni- 
versal, that is, of all those who, throughout the face of the 
whole earth, professed faith in Christ, and acknowledged 
him to be the Saviour of mankind. This Ireneus calls 
“the church dispersed through the whole world to the 
ends of the earth,’* and “the church scattered in the 
whole world.”® And Origen calls it “the church of God 
under heaven.”* This is that which they call the ca- 
tholic church, for catholic signifies the same as universal. 
Thus Polycarp, when he was seized by his murderers, 
prayed for “the catholic church throughout the world.”4 
And in this sense Dionysius Alexandrinus calls the per- 
secuting emperor Macrianus, “ a warrior against the ca- 
tholic church of God.” 

Il. The word church is frequently to be understood 
of a particular church, that is, of a company of believers, 
who at one time, in one and the same place, did associate 
themselves together, and concur in the participation of all 
the institutions and ordinances of Jesus Christ with their 
proper pastors and ministers. ‘Thus Ireneus mentions that 
church “ which is in any place.”£ And so Dionysius 
Alexandrinus writes, that when he was banished to Ce- 
phro, in Lybia, there came so many Christians unto him 
that even there he had a church.¢ Tertullian thinks that 


a'H éxkAnoia kad’ GAne tig oikoupevnc Ewe TEpaTwr THC yI¢ OLEO- 
mapuevn. Lib. 1, cap. 2, p. 34. 

>‘ éxxAgoia év 62M 7H Koop Stectapyevn. Lib. 1, cap. 3, p. 36. 

°'H urd Tov épavov éxxAnoia te Oe& Apud. Euseb. lib. 6, cap. 
25, p. 226. 

4 Tidone tig Kata tiv oiKeuevrnv KaBoAcKHe éxKAnoiac. Apud. Eus. 
lib. 4, cap. 15, p. 131. 

© THe Kabohixne Oe& éxxAnotag roréutoc. Epist. ad Herm. apud. 
Euseb. lib. 7, cap. 10, p. 256. 

f Ea que est in quoque ioco Ecclesia. Lib. 2, cap. 56, p. 158. 

8 ILOAAn ovverredjunoev juiv éxxAnoia. Apud. Euseb. lib. 7, cap. 
11, p. 259. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 21 


“three were sufficient to make achurch.”* In this sense 
we must understand the church of Rome,” the church of 
Smyma,¢ the church of Antioch,‘ the church of Athens,° 
the church of Alexandria, or the church in any other such 
place whatsoever, that is, a congregation of Christians 
assembling all together for religious exercises at Rome, 
Antioch, Smyrna, Athens, Alexandria, or such like places. 

III. The word church is sometimes used for the place 
where a particular church or congregation met for the 
celebration of divine service. ‘Thus Paulus Samosatenus, 
the heretical bishop of Antioch, ordered certain women to 
stand “in the middle of the church,” and sing psalms in 
his praise. So Clemens Alexandrinus adviseth that men 
and women should with all modesty and humility enter 
“into the church.”& So the clergy of the church of Rome, 
in their letter to Cyprian concerning the restitution of the 
lapsed, gave as their advice, “ that they should only come 
to the threshold of the church door, but not go over it.” 
And in this sense is the word frequently to be understood 
in Tertullian,’ Origen, and others, to recite whose testi- 
monies at large would be both tedious and needless. 

IV. I find the word church once used by Cyprian for 
a collection of many particular churches, who mentions 
in the singular number “the church of God in Africa 

4 Ubitres, Ecclesia est. Exhort. ad Castitat. p. 457. 

> Ecclesia Romana, Cyprian. Epist..31, § 3, p. 70. 

© °EKKAnoia tH oven év Zuvprvy. Ignat. ad Smym. p. 1. 

4 Tyv éxxAnoiav thv tv ’Avtioxeia. Idem. ibid. p. 8. 

© "ExxAnjoia 7 ’AOnvyat, év ’AAeSavdpeiz. Origen cont. Celsum. 
lib. 3, cap. 129. 

f'Ev péog tH éxxAnoia. Epist. Synod. Antioch apud Euseb. lib. 
7, cap. 30, p. 281. 

8 ’Ent tyv éxkAnoiav. Pedag. lib. 5, cap. 11, p. 189. 

» Adeant ad limen Ecclesie. Apud Cyprian. Epist. 31, §7, p. 71. 

i De prescript. advers. Heret. p. 90. De Corona Militis, p. 36. 
And very often in his book, De Virginibus velandis. 

* De Orat. § 20, p. 132. 


22 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


and Numidia.”* Else I do not remember that I ever met 
with it in this sense in any writings, either of this or the 
rest of the fathers ; but whenever they would speak of the 
Christians in any kingdom or province, they always said 
in the plural, the churches, never in the singular, the 
church, of such a kingdom or province. ‘Thus Dionysius 
Alexandrinus doth not say, the church, but, the churches 
of Cilicia.» And so Ireneus mentions the churches that 
were in Germany, Spain, France, the East, Egypt, and 
Libya. So also Tertullian speaks of the churches of 
Asia and Phrygia,‘ and the churches of Greece. And so 
of every country they always express the churches there- 
of in the plural number. 

V. The word church frequently occurs for that which 
we commonly call the invisible church, that is, for those 
who, by asound repentance and a lively faith, are actually 
interested in the Lord Jesus Christ: according to this 
signification of the word must we understand Tertullian, 
when he says, “ that Christ had espoused the church,”! 
and that “there was a spiritual marriage between Christ 
and the church.”¢ And that of Ireneus, “that the church 
was fitted according to the form of the Son of God.”» And 
in this sense is the word oftentimes used in others of the 
fathers, as I might easily show, if any one did doubt it. 


@ In Provincia Africa et Numidia Ecclesiam Domini, Epist. 71, § 4, 
p- 214. 

b At tie KiAkiag éxxAnoiat. Apud. Euseb. lib. 7, cap. 5, p. 251. 

© Ai éy Tepuaviate éxxAnoia, év taic I6ypiatc, év KeArtoic, cata 
tag ’Avatodde, év Atyirty, év AiBin. Lib. 1, cap. 3, p. 36. 

4 Ecclesiz Asie et Phrygie. Adversus Praxeam, p. 314. 

€ Per Greciam Ecclesie: De Virgin. veland. p. 386. 

f Christus sibi sponsabat Ecclesiam. Advers. Marcion. Lib. 4, p. 
196. 

& Spirituales nuptias Ecclesiz et Christi. Exhort. ad Castitat. p. 455. 

» Ecclesia ad figuram imaginis filii ejus coaptetur. Lib. 4, cap. 72, 
p. 308. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 28 


VI. The word church is frequently to be interpreted 
of the faith and doctrine of the church. In this sense 
Ireneus prays “that the heretics might be reclaimed from 
their heresies, and be converted to the church of God; 
and exhorts all sincere Christians not to follow heretics, 
but to “ fly to the church:”» upon which account heretics 
are said to have left the church, as Tertullian told Mar- 
cion, that when he became a heretic, ‘‘ he departed from 
the church of Christ :”° and their heresies are said to be 
dissonant from the church, as Origen writes, that the 
opinion of the transmigration of souls was “ alien from the 
church.’ 

There are yet several other significations of this word, 
though not so usual as some of the forementioned ones, 
nor so pertinent to my design, so that I might justly pass 
them over without so much as mentioning them: but lest 
any should be desirous to know them, I will just name 
them, and then proceed to what is more material. 

Besides then those former significations, the word, ac- 
cording to its original import, is also used for any congre- 
gation in general. Sometimes it is applied to any parti- 
cular sect of heretics, as Tertullian calls the Marcionites¢ 
the church of Marcion: at other times it is attributed to 
the orthodox, in opposition to the heretics, as by the same 
Tertullian.£ Sometimes it is appropriated to the heathen 
assemblies, as by Origen,’ at other times in opposition to 


2 Conversos ad ecclesiam Dei. Lib. 3, cap. 46, p. 229. 

> Confugere ad ecclesiam. Lib. 5, cap. 17, p. 342. 

¢ Ab Ecclesia Christi recessisti. De carne Christi, p. 13. 

a ’AAAOTpLov tHE éxKAnoiac. Comment. in Mat. Tom. 13, p. 304, 
Vol. 1. 

® Ecclesiam suam. Adversus Marcion. lib. 5, p. 255. 

f Hereses Ecclesiam lacessentes. De prescript. advers. Heret. 
p. 69. 

& ’ExkAnotate devodamovor, kat dKkoAdcwr, cai ddixwy. Contra Cels. 
lib. 2, p. 128, 


24 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


the Jews, it is ascribed to the believing Gentiles, as by 
Ireneus :* in some places it is taken for the deputies of a 
particular church, as in Ignatius.’ In other places it sig- 
nifies the assembly of the spirits of just men made perfect 
in heaven, which we commonly call the church triumph- 
ant, as in Clemens Alexandrinus.© Once I find it denoting 
the laity only, in opposition to the clergy: and once sig- 
nifying only Christ as the head of the faithful.¢ 

§ 2. But the usual and common acceptation of the word, 
and of which we must chiefly treat, is that of a particular 
church, that is, a society of Christians, meeting together 
in one place, under their proper pastors, for the perform- 
ance of religious worship, and the exercising of Christian 
discipline. 

Now the first thing that naturally presents itself to our 
consideration is, to inquire into the constituent parts of a 
particular church, or who made up and composed such a 
church. In the general they were called éAexroi, “ the 
elect,”* “the called and sanctified by the will of God.” 
And in innumerable places they are called adeAgoi, “ the 
brethren,” because of their brotherly love and affection ; 
and mcol, “the faithful,” in opposition to the pagan world, 
who had no faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, nor in the 
promises of the gospel. But more particularly we may 


a Ea que ex gentibus est Ecclesia. Lib. 4, cap. 37, p. 271. 

> "Aomdlouat tude ard Suipyye dua Taig ovprapsoaic ws éxxAnoiae 
tov Geov. Ad Philadelph. p. 52. 

© Ovpdvioy éxxAnoiay, Pedag. lib. 2, cap. 1, p. 104. 

4 ’Erioxoro: kai Ipeobirepot, kai Ardkovot, cat al éxxAnoiat tod 
Ocod. Apud. Euseb. lib. 7, cap. 30, p. 279. 

* Ecclesia vero Christus, Tertullian. de pcenitentia, p. 382. 

f Epist. Eccles. Smyrn. ad Eccles. Philomel. apud Euseb. lib. 4, 
cap. 15, p. 134. 

& KAnroic cai nyvaopévorg év SeAjwat: Ges. Clem. Rom. Epist. 1, 
ad Cor. p. 1. 


’ 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 25 


divide them into two parts; into the people that composed 
the body of the church, and those persons who were set 
apart for religious and ecclesiastical employments : or to 
conform to our ordinary dialect, into the clergy and laity, 
which is an early distinction, being mentioned by Clemens 
Romanus,* and after him by Origen,” and several others. 

§ 3. Each of these had their particular offices, and both 
together had their joint employments, to all which I shall 
distinctly speak in the ensuing tract, as they naturally 
resolve themselves into these three particulars :— 

I. The peculiar acts of the clergy. 

II. The peculiar acts of the laity. 

III. The joint acts of them both. 

By the resolution of which three questions some disco- 
very will be made of the constitution and discipline of the 
primitive church, and of their practice with respect to 
many points unhappily controverted among us. 

§ 4. I begin with the first of these, what were the pecu- 
liar acts of the clergy? Now here must be considered 
the functions of every particular order and degree of the 
clergy, which we may say to be three, viz., bishops, 
priests, and deacons, whose employments we shall seve- 
rally handle ; as also several other points, which under 
those heads shall offer themselves unto us. I shall begin 
first with the bishop ; but for the better understanding both 
of him and the rest, it will be necessary, first of all, to 
consider the condition of the whole world, as it was be- 
fore the preaching of the gospel, in a state of paganism 
and darkness, having their understandings clouded with 
ignorance and error, alienated from God, and the true 
worship of him ; applauding their own brutish inventions, 


e 


* Toi¢lepedowvidsoc 6 témog mpocétaktat, 6 Aaixd¢g dvOpwrog Toi¢ 
Aaixowg mpocdypaaw dédetat. Epist. 1. ad Cor. p. 53. 
> Homil. 11 in Jerem. pp. 113, 114, vol. 1. 


2 


26 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


and adoring as God whatever their corrupted reason and 
silly fancies proposed to them as objects of adoration and 
homage. Into this miserable state all mankind, except 
the Jews, had wilfully cast themselves; and had not 
Christ, the Sun of righteousness, enlightened them, they 
would have continued in that lost and blind condition to 
this very day. But our Saviour having on his cross tri- 
umphed over principalities and powers, and _ perfectly 
conquered the devil, who before had ruled effectually in 
the heathen world; and being ascended into heaven, and 
sat down at the right hand of the Father, on the day of 
pentecost he sent down the Holy Ghost on his apostles 
and disciples, who were then assembled at Jerusalem, 
enduing them thereby with the gift of tongues, and work- 
ing miracles, and both commissionating and fitting them 
for the propagation of his church and kingdom, who having 
received this power and authority from on high, went forth 
preaching the gospel, first, to the Jews, and then to the Gen- 
tiles, declaring those glad tidings to all kinedoms and pro- 
vinces ; so that, as the apostle Paul said, “‘ Their sound went 
out into all the earth, and their words unto the ends of the 
world,” Rom. x, 18; every one taking a particular part of 
the world for his proper province, to make known the joy- 
ful news of life and salvation through Christ therein. Thus 
St. Andrew principally preached the gospel in Scythia, 
St. Bartholomew in India, St. Matthew in Parthia, St. 
John in the Lesser Asia, and all the rest of. the apostles 
had their particular provinces allotted them, wherein they 
went forth preaching the gospel; and as they came to 
any city, town, or village, they published to the inhabitants 
thereof the blessed news of life and immortality through 
Jesus Christ, constituting the first converts of every place 
through which they passed, bishops and deacons of those 
churches which they there gathered. So saith Clemens 
Romanus, “ The apostles went forth preaching in city and 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 27 


country, appointing the first-fruits of their ministry for 
bishops and deacons,” generally leaving those bishops 
and deacons to govern and enlarge those particular 
churches over which they had placed them, whilst they 
themselves passed forward, planted other churches, and 
placed governors over them. ‘Thus saith Tertullian, 
“Clemens was ordained bishop of Rome by St. Peter, 
and Polycarp bishop of Smyrna by St. John.” 

§ 5. Whether in the apostolic and primitive days there 
were more bishops than one in a church, at first sight 
seems difficult to resolve: that the Holy Scriptures and 
Clemens Romanus‘ mention many in one church is cer- 
tain: and, on the other hand, it is as certain that Ignatius, 
Tertullian, Cyprian, and the following fathers affirm that 
there was, and ought to be, but one ina church. These 
contradictions may at the first view seem inextricable; but 
I hope the following account will reconcile all these 
seeming difficulties, and withal afford us a fair and easy 
conception of the difference between the ancient bishops 
and presbyters. 

I shall then lay down as sure, that there was but one 
supreme bishop in a place, that was the 6 érioxoroc—the 
bishop by way of eminency and propriety—the proper 
pastor and minister of his parish, to whose care and trust 
the souls of that church, or parish, over which he pre- 
sided, were principally and more immediately committed. 
So saith Cyprian, ‘‘ There is but one bishop in a church at 
a time.”¢ And so Cornelius objects to Novatian, that he 


* Kalicavov tac anapyac avtav ig éxtoxérec Kai deaxdvec. Epist. 
1. ad Corinth. p. 54. 

> Smymezorum Ecclesia habens Polycarpum ab Johanne conlocatum, 
Romanorum Clementem a Petro ordinatum. De prescript. adversus 
Her. p. 80. 

© *Yrotacobuevor Toig yysuévore Yuov. Hpist. 1. ad Cor. p. 2. 

4 Unus in Ecclesia ad tempus Sacerdos. Epist. 55. § 6. p. 188. 


28 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


did not remember “that there ought to be but one bishop 
in a church.*” And throughout the whole epistles of Ig- 
natius, and the generality of writers succeeding him, we 
find but one single bishop in a church, whose quotations 
to which purpose would be fruitless to recite here, since 
the constant practice of the universal church confirms it, 
and a great part of the following discourse will clearly 
illustrate it. 

Only it may not be impertinent to remark this by the 
way, that by the dcadoyai, or succession of bishops from 
those bishops who were ordained by the apostles, the 
orthodox were wont to prove the succession of their faith, 
and the novelty of that of the heretics. ‘‘ Let them de- 
monstrate the original of their churches,” as Tertullian 
challenges the Marcionites, and other heretics ; “let them 
turn over the orders of their bishops, and see whether they 
have had a succession of bishops from any one who was 
constituted by the apostles or apostolic men: thus the truly 
apostolic churches have, as the church of Smyrna has 
Polycarp there placed by St. John, and the church of 
Rome Clement, ordained by Peter; and other churches 
can tell who were ordained bishops over them by the 
apostles, and who have been their successors to this very 
day.”» So also says Irenzus, ‘ We challenge the hereties 


@ Ov« Aricato tva éxioxorov deiv elvar tv KaSoAtKh éxxAnoia. Ad 
Fabium. Antioch. apud Euseb. lib. 6, cap. 43, p. 244. 


> Edant origines ecclesiarum suarum, evolvant ordinem episcoporum 
suorum, ita per successiones ab initio decurrentem, ut primus ille episco- 
pus aliquem ex apostolis vel apostolicis viris, qui tamen eum apostolis per- 
severaverit, habuerit autorem et antecessorem. Hoc enim modo eccle- 
siz apostolice census suos deferunt, sicut Smyrnzorum ecclesia habens 
Polycarpum ab Johanne conlocatum refert, sicut Romanorum Clementem 
a Petro ordinatum proinde utique exhibent, quos ab apostolis in episco- 
patum constitutos, apostolici seminis traduces habeant. De prescript. 
adversus Heret. p. 78. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 29 


to that tradition which was handed down from the apostles 
by the succession of bishops.”* 

And in the next chapter of the same” book the said 
father gives us a catalogue of the bishops of Rome till his 
days, by whom the true faith was successively transmitted 
down from the apostles ; in which catalogue we find but 
one bishop at a time ; and as he died, so another single 
person succeeded him in the charge of that flock or 
parish. 

So that this consideration evidences also that there was 
but one bishop, strictly so called, in a church at a time, 
who was related to his flock as a pastor to his sheep, and 
a parent to his children.c The titles of this supreme 
church officer are most of them reckoned up in one place 
by Cyprian, which are, “ bishop, president, pastor, govern- 
or, superintendent, and priest.”4 And this is he which 
in the Revelation is called “the angel of his church,”¢ 
as Origen thinks, which appellations denote both his au- 
thority and office, his power and duty, of both which we 
shall somewhat treat, after we have discoursed of the cir- 
cuit and extent of his jurisdiction and superintendency, 
which shall be the contents of the following chapter. 


a Eam traditionem que est ab apostolis, que per successiones pres- 
byterorum in ecclesiis custoditur, provocamus eos. Lib. 3, cap. 2, 
p- 170. 

b Lib. 3, cap. 3, pp. 170, 171. 

¢ A pastore oves, et filios 4 parente separare. Cypr. Epist. 38, 
§ 1, p. 90. 

d Episcopus, prepositus, pastor, gubernator, antistes, sacerdos. 
Epist. 69, § 5, p. 208. 

© Tlposcirac tivac tv éxkAnodv ayyéAse Aeyeodat Tapa TO "lwdv- 
vy év TH ’Arokadtiwer. De Orat. § 35, p. 34. 


30 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


CHAPTER II. 


§ 1. As but one bishop to a church, so but one church to a bishop. 
The bishop’s cure never called a diocess, but usually a parish, no 
larger than our parishes. § 2. Demonstrated by several arguments. 
§ 3. A survey of the extent of several bishoprics, as they were in 
Ignatius’s days, as of Smyrna. 9 4. Ephesus. § 5. Magnesia. 
§ 6. Philadelphia. And, § 7. Trallium. § 8. The bigness of the 
diocess of Antioch. § 9. Of Rome. § 10. Of Carthage. § 11. A 
reflection on the diocess of Alexandria. § 12. Bishops in villages. 
§ 13. Allthe Christians of a diocess met together in one place every 
Sunday to serve God. 


§ 1. Havine in the former chapter shown that there 
was but one bishop to a church, we shall in this evidence 
that there was but one church to a bishop, which will 
appear from this single consideration, viz., that the ancient 
diocesses are never said to contain churches, in the plural, 
but only a church, in the singular. So they say, the 
church of the Corinthians,* the church of Smyrna,> the 
church in Magnesia, the church in Philadelphia,* the 
church in Antioch,* and so of any other place whatsoever, 
the church of, or in such a place. 

This was the common name whereby a bishop’s cure 
was denominated, the bishop himself being usually called 
the bishop of this or that church, as Tertullian saith, that 
Polycarp was ordained bishop of the church of Smyrna.‘ 

As for the word diocess, by which the bishop’s flock is 
now usually expressed, I do not remember that ever I 
found it used in this sense by any of the ancients: but 


Tyv Kopiw6iwy éxxAnoiav. Clem. Rom. Epist. 1, p. 62. 

Smymnis ecclesia. Ireneus, lib. 3, cap. 3, p. 171. 

© Ty éxxAnsiav thv obvoav év Mayvyoia. Ignat. Epist. 4, p. 30. 

a "ExkdAnoia th aon év OiAadeAdig. Idem. Epist. 5, p. 38. 

© Tyv éxxAnoiav thv év ’Avtioxeia. Idem ibidem, p. 45. 
Polycarpus in Smyrnis ecclesie constitutus episcopus. Iren. lib. 
3, cap. 3, p. 171. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. aL 


there is another word, still retained by us, by which they 
frequently denominated the bishop’s cure, and that is 
parish ; so in the synodical epistle of Irenzus to Pope Vic- 
tor, the bishoprics of Asia are twice called parishes.» And 
in Eusebius’s Ecclesiastical History the word is so applied 
in several hundred places. It is usual there to read of the 
bishops of the parish of Alexandria,» of the parish of 
Ephesus,* of the parish of Corinth, of the parish of 
Athens,° of the parish of Carthage ;f and so of the bishops 
of the parishes of several other churches ; by that term de- 
noting the very same that we now call a parish, viz., a 
competent number of Christians dwelling near togéther, 
having one bishop, pastor, or minister set over them, with 
whom they all met at one time to worship and serve God. 
This may be evinced from the intent of the word itself, 
which signifies a dwelling one by another, as neighbours 
do; or a habitation in one and the same place, as the 
church of Smyrna wrote to the church that parished in 
Philomelium, 77 wapocxéon év SrAoundiw.s And the epistle 
of Clemens Romanus is to the church of God parishing at 
Corinth, zaporxéoy Képiv Sov,» that is, dwelling or living in 
Philomelium and Corinth; so that a parish is the same 
with a particular church, or a single congregation ; which 
is yet more evident from a passage in the dissertations of 
Apollonius against Alexander, a Cataphrygian heretic, 
wherein it is said, that because that heretic had been a 
robber, therefore that parish to which he belonged would 


2 Tov rapotxiov. Apud Euseb. lib. 5, cap. 14, p. 193. 

b Tie év AdeSavdpeia wapotxiac. Lib. 2, cap. 24, p. 66. 
© Tic év ’Edéow mapotkiac. Lib. 3, cap.4, p. 73. 

4 Tie Kopiwdiov rapotxiac. Lib. 3, cap. 4, p. 74. 

© Tie ’ASnvaiwy rapotkiacg. Lib. 4, cap. 23, p. 144. 

f Tic kata Kapyndéva raporxiac. Lib. 7, cap. 3, p. 251. 
s Apud Euseb. lib. 4, cap. 15, p. 228. 

h Epist. 1, ad Cor. p. 1. 


32 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


not receive him;* that is, that particular church or con- 
gregation to which he appertained excluded him from 
communion because of his depredations and robberies ; so 
that a parish and a particular church are synonymous 
terms, signifying one and the same thing; and conse- 
quently a bishop having but one parish under his juris- 
diction, could extend his government no further than one 
single congregation ; because a single congregation and a 
parish were all one, of the same bulk and magnitude. 

§ 2. But that the bishop’s diocess exceeded not the 
bounds of a modern parish, and was the same, asin name, 
so alSo in thing, will appear from these following obser- 
vations, as, 

1. All the people of a diocess did, every Sunday, meet 
all together in one place to celebrate divine service. Thus 
saith Justin Martyr, “On Sunday all assemble together 
in one place, where the bishop preaches and prays ;””” for, 
as Ignatius writes, ‘‘ where the bishop is, there the peo- 
ple must be;”* and “ there is a necessity that we do nothing 
without the bishop ;”4 since “ it is unlawful to do any thing 
without him ;”¢ for “‘where the pastor is there the sheep 
ought to follow ;”* wherefore, “as Christ did nothing with- 
out the Father, so do you nothing without the bishop and 
presbyters, but assemble into the same place, that you 
may have one prayer, one supplication, one mind, and one 


a ‘H idia rapotkia aitov bev qv odx édéEato. Apud. Euseb. lib. 
5, cap. 18, p. 185. 

b Tldvtwy éxt To avto ovvédevore yiverat. Apol. 1, p. 98. 

© "Ors dv avy 0 émtoxorog éxet TO TAH SO¢ sw. Epist. ad Smyrn. 
p- 6. 

ad ’Avayxaloy ovv Ectv dvev Tod émloxére undév mpdocew tude. Ep. 
ad Tralles. p. 48. 

© OvK eov écwv yupic tov éxcoxdrs, ove Barrivev, obte dydmrnv 
moveiv. Epist. ad Smyrn. p. 6. 

{ "Ore dé 6 rouuyy ecu, éxel @¢ mpdbata aKoAsVeite. Epist. ad. 
Philadelph. p. 42. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 33 


hope ;”* “for if the prayer of one or two have so great a 
force, how much more prevalent must that be which is 
made by the bishop and the whole church! He then that 
doth not assemble together is proud, and hath condemned 
himself: for it is written, ‘ God resisteth the proud.’ Let 
us not therefore resist the bishop, that we may be subject 
to God.”® So that these passages clearly prove, that all 
the members of the bishop’s church assembled together in 
one place to send up their common prayers to the throne 
of grace, and to discharge those other religious duties 
which were incumbent on them, which convincingly, evi- 
dences the bishop’s church to be no bigger than our par- 
ishes; for if it had been bigger, it would have been 
impossible that the members thereof should have con- 
stantly assembled together in one place, as we see here 
they did. 

2. The bishop had but one altar or communion-table in 
his whole diocess, at which his whole flock received the 
sacrament from him. ‘“ There is but one altar,” says Ig- 
natius, ‘‘ as there is but one bishop.”« At this altar the 
bishop administered the sacrament to his whole flock at 
one time. So writes Cyprian: ‘ We celebrate the sacra- 
ment, the whole brotherhood being present.”4 And thus 
it was in Justin Martyr’s days: “the bishop’s whole dio- ~ 
cess met together on Sunday, when the bishop gave them 

a “Avev Tob éxtoxorov Kal TOv mpEecBuTépav pundév Tpdoonte, GAN’ 
éxl Td aiTo pia mpocevyn, pla dénare, Eig voto, wia EAmic. Epist. ad 
Magnes., page 33. 

° El yap Evoc Kal devtépov mpocevyn TooavTyv loxiv Exel, TOow 
udAAov ite Tod extoxOTov, Kal TaoNG ExkAnoiac; 6 ody pH EpYomEvog 
émi TO avTd, ovtog ijdn UTEpndavel Kai éavTov dteKpivev’ yéypantat 
yap trepnddvorg 6 Oedc avtitdcceTar orovddlupev obv uy avTiTdo- 
cecbat TH éricKk6rw, iva Guev Océ VroTacobuevot. Epist. ad Eph. p.20. 

¢ “Ev Gvotactipiov ae eig éxioxoroc. Epist. ad Philad. p. 41. 

4 Sacramenti veritatem fraternitate omni presente celebramus. 
Epist. 63, § 12, p. 177. 

9* 


34 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


the eucharist ; and if any were absent, he sent it to them by 
the deacons.”* Certainly that diocess could not be large 
where all usually communicated at one time, and the dea- 
cons carried about the consecrated eucharist to those that 
were absent; which would have been an endless and 
painful task for the deacons, had their bishopric contained 
more Christians in it than one congregation would have 
held. Tertullian writes, that in his time and country, 
“the Christians received the sacrament of the Lord’s 
supper from the hands of the bishop alone.” Now in 
those days and places they communicated at least three 
times a week, viz., Wednesdays, Fridays, and Lord’s 
days,° which had been impossible to have been done if 
the bishop had had inspection over more than one congre- 
gation, as is obvious to every one’s reason ; for the bishop, 
being finite and corporeal as well as others, could not be 
present in many places at once, but must be confined to 
one determinate fixed place, in which alone he could 
administer and dispense the eucharist: and for this reason 
it is that Ignatius exhorts the Philadelphians “ to use the 
one eucharist,”¢ that is, not to leave the bishop, and com- 
municate elsewhere, but to partake of that single euchar- 
ist which was administered by him: for, as he proceeds 
to say in the same place, “there is but one body of our 
Lord Jesus Christ, one cup, one altar, and one bishop.”« 
As there was but one bishop in a church, so there was 
but one altar, a bishop and an altar being correlates: so 

a Tq T& yAiov Asyouervy tuépe Tavtav éxi TO adTo cuvédevore yive- 
Tal, Ovddoarg Kai 7 uEeTaAnWLc Gawd TOV ebyapicnVévTaV Exdcw yiveral, 
kal Toi¢ & wapovor dia Tov dtakévey BéuweTat. Apol. 2, p. 98. 

> Nec de aliorum manu quam de presidentium sumimus. De coro- 
na militis, p. 338. 

© Vid. de Oratione, p. 661. 

4 Mia ebyapicia ypyoSa. Epist. ad Philadelp. p. 40. 

* Mia yap caps tov Kupizs tudv ’lnood Xpicod, Kai év worhpiov, év 
Svorachplov, Oc eic éwioxowoc. Ibid. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. ab 


that to set up another altar was a periphrasis of a schis- 
matic, or of one that causelessly separated from his lawful 
bishop, and set up another, which was that they called 
schism, as we shall show in its proper place. Thus 
Cyprian describes a schismatic as one “ that contemns 
his bishop, leaves the ministers of God, and dares to set 
up another altar :”* and particularly he brands Novatian as 
such a one, because “ he erected a profane altar ;”» that is, 
an altar in opposition to the altar of Cornelius, his lawful 
bishop. For, as he saith in another place, “no man can 
regularly constitute a new bishop, or erect a new altar, 
besides the one bishop, and the one altar ;”« for which 
reason he calls the altar that is erected by schismatics 
against the one altar of their lawful bishops, “a profane 
altar,”? which agrees with that of Ignatius, that “ he that 
is within the altar is pure, but he that does any thing 
without the bishops, priests, and deacons, is impure ;’¢ 
and as he says in another place, “‘ Whosoever is without 
the altar, wants the bread of God.”! 

3. The other sacrament of baptism was generally ad- 
ministered by the bishops alone within their respective 
diocesses. So saith Tertullian, “ Before the bishop we 
renounce the devil and the world.”s For as Cyprian 


2 Contemptis episcopis, et Dei sacerdotibus derelictis, constituere 
audet aliud altare. De Unitat. Ecclesie, § 15, p. 301. 

> Profanum altare erigere. LEpist. 67,9 2, p. 193. 

¢ Aliud altare constitui, aut sacerdotium novum fieri, preter unum 
altare, et unum sacerdotium, non potest. LEpist. 40, § 4, p. 93. 

@ Altare profanum. KEpist. 65, § 4, p. 193. 

© ‘O évtog Guotacnpie av, kabapo¢ éctv, TovT écwv, 6 ywpic éaue- 
K0as Kal BpEecBuTEpis Kai OLAaKOvs BpPdcowyY TL, OvTOG od Kadapébg ecu” 
Th ovveronoer. Epist. ad Tralles. p. 50. 

f Edy pn tee H évtoc Tod Yuoracnpis, bcepeitae Tod apts Tob Oeod. 
Epist. ad. Ephes. p. 20. 

& Sub antistite contestamur nos renunciare diabolo et pompe. De 
Corona Militis, p. 336. 


36 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


says, “the bishops ought only to baptize :”* and to the 
same effect writes Fortunatus, bishop of Thucabori, that 
our Lord Jesus Christ “ gave unto the bishops the power 
of baptizing.”» So that the bishops did ordinarily baptize 
all the persons that were baptized in their diocesses ; 
and if so, it is not probable, I may say possible, that their 
diocesses were extended beyond the bulk of single con- 
gregations. 

4. The church’s charity was deposited with the bishop, 
who, as Justin Martyr reports, “‘ was the common curator 
and overseer of all the orphans, widows, diseased, stran- 
gers, imprisoned, and, in a word, of all those that were 
needy and indigent.”* ‘To this charitable office Ignatius 
adviseth Polycarpus ;4 but of that advice more shall be 
spoken in another place; only let us observe, that that 
diocess could not be very large where the bishop per- 
sonally relieved and succoured all the poor and indigent 
therein. 

5. All the people of a diocess were present at church 
censures, as Origen describes an offender as appearing “ be- 
fore the whole church.”* So Clemens Romanus calls the 
censures of the church ‘“ the things commanded by the mul- 
titude.”* And so the two offending sub-deacons and acolyth 
at Carthage were to be tried “before the whole people.”s 


* Non nisi ecclesie prepositis licere baptizare. Epist. 73, §6, p. 220. 

> Potestatem baptizandi episcopis dedit. Act. Concil. Carth. apud 
Cyprian. p. 445. 

© Avrog émixepet dpdavoic Te Kai yhpat¢e Kal Toi¢ dia véoov 7 OV 
GAAnv aitiav Aerouévote, Kai Toig év Decpoig ovoL, Kat Toig TapEeTLdA- 
potg ovat Eévowc, Kai drAGe, Toi év Ypeia ovo KndEeuov yivetat. Apol. 
2, p. 99. 

d Epist. ad. Polycarp. p. 12. 

© "Eni maone tig éxxAnoiac. Comment. in Matth. Tom. 13, p. 335, 
vol. 1. 

£ Ta rpocacoépeva bxd Tod TAAV8¢. Epist. 1 ad Cor. p. 69. 

8 Plebe universé. Cyprian. Epist. 28, § 2, p. 64. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 37 


6. No offenders were restored again to the church’s 
peace, without the knowledge and consent of the whole 
diocess: so Cyprian writes, that before they were re- 
admitted to communion “ they were to plead their cause 
before all the people.”* . And it was ordained by an Afri- 
can synod, that except in danger of death, or an instanta- 
neous persecution, none should be received into the 
church’s peace ‘“ without the knowledge and consent of 
the people.”» 

7. When the bishop of a church was dead, all the peo- 
ple of that church met together in one place to choose a 
new bishop. So Sabinus was elected bishop of Emerita 
“by the suffrage of all the brotherhood ;”* which was also 
the custom throughout all Africa, “for the bishop to be 
chosen in the presence of the people.” And so Fabianus 
was chosen to be bishop of Rome “ by all the brethren 
who were met together in one place for that very end.”e 

8. At the ordination of the clergy the whole body of 
the people were present. So an African synod, held 
anno 258, determined “ that the ordination of ministers 
ought to be done with the knowledge and in the presence 
of the people, that the people being present, either the 
crimes of the wicked may be detected, or the merits of 
the good declared; and so the ordination may be just and 
lawful, being approved by the suffrage and judgment of 


a Acturi causam apud plebem universam. Epist. 10, § 4, p. 30. 

b Sine petitu et conscientia plebis. Apud Cyprian. Epist. 59, § 1, 
p- 164. 

¢ De universe fraternitatis suffragio. Apud. Cyprian. Epist. 68, 
§ 6, p. 102. 

d Apud nos quoque et feré per provincias universas tenetur, ut ad 
eam plebem cui prepositus ordinatur, episcopi ejusdem provincie prox- 
imi quique conveniant, et episcopus deligatur plebe presente. Ibid. 

© Tév yap ddcAbdv ardvrav yetpotoviacg Evexev im THg ExKAnoiag 
ovykekpotnuévwov. Apud. Euseb. lib. 6, cap. 28, p. 229. 


38 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


all.”* And Bishop Cyprian writes from his exile to all the 
people of his diocess, that “it had been his constant prac- 
tice in all ordinations to consult their opinions, and by their 
common counsels to weigh the manners and merits of 
every one:”? therein imitating the example of the apostles 
and apostolic men, who ordained none but with “the ap- 
probation of the whole church.”¢ 

9. Public letters from one church to another were read 
before the whole diocess. Thus Cornelius, bishop of 
Rome, whatever letters he received from foreign churches, 
“he always read them to his most holy and numerous 
people.”4 And without doubt, when Firmilian wrote “to 
all the parish of Antioch,”e they could all assemble to- 
gether to read his letter and return an answer to it; since 
we find that im those days one whole church wrote to an- 
other whole church, as “the church of Rome wrote to 
the church of Corinth.”* And Cyprian “and his whole 
flock” sent gratulatory letters to Pope Lucius upon his 
return from exile. 

Lastly, the whole diocess of the bishop did meet all 


2 Ordinationes sacerdotales non nisi sub populi assistentis conscientia 
fieri oportere, ut plebe presente vel detegantur malorum crimina, vel 
bonorum merita predicentur, et sit ordinatio justa et legitima, que om- 
nium suffragio et judicio fuerit examinata. Apud Cyprian. Epist. 68, 
§ 4, p. 201. 

> Tn ordinationibus clericis, fratres charissimi, solemus vos ante con- 
sulere, et mores, ac merita singulorum communi concilio ponderare. 
Ad Plebem Universam. Epist. 33, p. 76. 

© Zuvevdoknodone tic éxxAnoiac maéonc. Clemens Romanus, epist. 
1 ad Corin. p. 57. 

4 Sanctissime atque amplissime plebi legere. Cyprian. Epist. 55, 
§ 21, p. 154. : 

© TH mapoikiag maon. Epist. Synod. Antioch. apud Euseb. lib. 7, 
cap. 30, p. 279. 

*‘'H éxkAnoia tot Oe0d rapotkodca ‘Péunv, TH éxkAgoia tod Oeod 
mapotkoton KépivSov. Clem. Rom. Epist. 1, p. 1. 

& Fraternitasomnis. Cyprian. Epist. 58, § 2, p. 163. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 39 


together to manage church affairs. Thus when the schism 
of Filicissimus in the bishopric of Carthage was to be 
debated, ‘it was to be done according to the will of the 
people, and by the consent of the laity.”» And when 
there were some hot disputes about the restitution of the 
lapsed, the said Cyprian promised his whole diocess, 
“that all those things should be examined before them, 
and be judged by them.”» And so also when they were 
to send a messenger to any foreign church, all the people 
could meet together to choose that messenger, as they 
could in the “ church of Philadelphia.”« 

Now put all these observations together, and duly con- 
sider whether they do not prove the primitive parishes to 
be no larger than our modern ones are, that is, that they 
had no more believers or Christians in them than there 
are now in ours. I do not say that the ancient bishoprics 
had no larger territories, or no greater space of ground 
than our parishes have. On the contrary, it is very pro- 
bable that many of them had much more; since, in those 
early days of Christianity, in many places the faithful 
might be so few, as that for twenty or thirty miles round 
they might associate together under one bishop, and make 
up but one church, and that a small one too: but this I 
say, that how large soever their local extent was, their 
members made but one single congregation, and had no 
more Christians in it than our parishes now have ; for that 
diocess cannot possibly be more than one single congre- 
gation where all the people met together at one time, 
prayed together, received the sacrament together, assisted 
at church censures together, and despatched church affairs 


@ Secundum arbitrium quoque vestrum, ea que agenda sunt dis- 
ponere pariter et limare poterimus. Ad Plebem Epist. 40, § 7, p. 94. 

> Tune examinabuntur singula presentibus et judicantibus vobis. 
Ad Plebem Epist. 12, § 1, p. 37. 

© Xerporovjcar diékovov. Ignat. Epist.ad Phil. p. 45. 


40 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


together; and yet the members of the primitive diocesses 
did all this together, as the preceding observations evi- 
dently declare; so that I might stop here, and add no 
further proofs to that which hath been already so clearly 
proved. 

§ 3. But yet, that we may more clearly illustrate this 
point, we shall demonstrate it by another method, viz., by 
showing the real bulk and size of those bishoprics con- 
cerning which we have any notices remaining on ancient 
records; and manifest, that the very largest of them were 
no greater than our particular congregations are. And for 
the proof of this we shall quote the writings of St. Ignatius, 
in whose genuine epistles there is such an account of the 
bishoprics of Smyrna, Ephesus, Magnesia, Philadelphia, 
and Trallium, as manifestly evidences them to be but so 
many single congregations. 

As for the diocess of Smyrna, its extent could not be 
very large, since “nothing of church affairs was done 
there without the bishop; he baptized and administered 
the eucharist, and none else could do it within his cure 
without his permission; wherever he was his whole flock 
followed him;”* which they might, without any incon- 
veniency, do, since they “frequently assembled toge- 
ther ;”» as Ignatius advised Polycarp, the bishop of this 
church, “to convene his diocess to choose a faithful, 
honest man to send a messenger into Syria:”¢ so that the 
bishop of this church “ could know his whole flock person- 
ally by their names,”¢ carrying himself respectfully and 

4 Mndeic yupic Tov éxtoxérov Ti mpaccéTw THY avynK6yTwY Eig THY 
éxkAnotav, éxeivn Bebaia evyapicia jysioSw 7 UO Tov ériokoToV ovoa 
7 @ av adbtoc éxitpéy baov dv gavA 6 éwioxowos Exer TO TAHVOC Ecw: 
obk éov ecw ywopi¢ Tov éwioxdwov oiTe Baawrilev, ovTE ayaDNY GDol- 
eiv, GAW’ 6 Gv éketvoc Ookyudoy. Epist. ad Smyrn. p. 6. 

> Tluxvérepov ovvaywyat ywvéoSwoayv. Epist. ad Polycarp. p. 18. 

© Wpewet ovpbotdArov ayaysiv yetpotovyoa tiva, &e. Ibid. p. 15. 

4 "ES ovouarog wadvtac Carer. Ibid. p. 13. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 4] 


charitably to all “ with all meekness and humility toward 
serving men and serving maids,’”* and charitably, “ taking 
care of the widows within his diocess,”» permitting ‘“ no- 
thing to be done there without his privity.”* Insomuch 
“that none were married without his previous advice and 
consent.”4 Now, how all these things could be done, 
how all this bishopric could meet together in one place, 
how the bishop could personally know all the members 
thereof by their respective names, even the meanest ser- 
ving maids therein, and permit none to be married without 
his knowledge and advice, without reducing this diocess 
to a single parish, I know not. 

§ 4. As to the diocess of Ephesus, there was but one 
altar or communion-table in its whole territory, at which 
they all communicated together; whence they are said 
“to break the one bread;”e and “he that was without, or 
separated from that altar,” is said “to want the bread of 
God.” The members also of this church could all meet 
together in one place, to send up their joint prayers to 
God in Christ: and therefore Ignatius condemns all those 
of that diocess “ who did not assemble together in that one 
place, with the rest of the members thereof, to send up 
their prayers to God, as proud, self-conceited, and justly 
condemnable ;”s because thereby they deprived them- 
selves of that inconceivable benefit that would accrue 
unto them by joiming in the prayers of the whole church. 


2 AodAove kai dobAac un vaepngodvet. Epist. ad Polycarp. p. 13. 

> X7pat pn auedeioSwoav. Ibid. p. 12. 

© Mndev avev yvounc cov yivéoSw. Ibid. p. 12. 

@ TIpéwet J toig yapotvor kai Tag yapwovuévarg peta yvoung Tod 
éaloxéaov THv évwow aoteioda. Ibid. p. 13. 

© "Eva aptov KkAévreg. Epist. ad Ephes. pp. 20, 29. 

f "Eav un tic 7 évto¢ ToD Suotacnpiov, bcepeitat Tov apTov Tov OeEod. 
Ibid. p. 20. 

s 'O ovy py épxouevog ent Td avTO, obTOg 70n dTEPHoavel, Kal EavTOV 
duexpivev. Ibid. p. 20. 


42 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


“ For if the prayer of one or two hath so great a force 

with God, how much more prevalent must the prayer of 
the bishop and the whole church be!”* So that if to 
communicate together, and to pray together, be the marks 
of a particular church, then this bishopric was one. 

§ 5. As to the church of Magnesia, they all assembled 
with the bishop, having but ‘one church,”> and “ one 
altar,”* “joining all together in one prayer,’ because “ to 
have congregated elsewhere would have been against 
conscience and precept.”* Now how large such a church 
is, where there is but one meeting-place, and one altar, 
where all communicate and pray together, is no hard mat- 
ter to determine. 

§ 6. Touching the bishopric of Philadelphia, its extent 
may be guessed at by this, that the members thereof 
“could do nothing without the bishop,”! “ who being their 
shepherd, wherever he was they were to follow him like 
sheep,” ‘receiving the sacrament altogether from him,” 
“at that one altar belonging to their diocess ;”! which 
they might well enough do, since their multitudes were 
not so great, but that on other occasions they could meet 
all together, as “to choose a messenger to send to the 
church at Antioch in Syria.”§ 


a Ei yap évog kai devtépov apocevyy tocattnv icxiv Eyel, woow 
paAdov re Tod é@LoKé6qOV Kai Gadonc exKAgoiac. Epist. ad Ephes. p. 20. 

> Ei¢ vad¢ Ocod. Epist. ad Magnes. p. 34. 

© "Ev Guovachpiov. Ibid. p. 34. 

4 "Emi 70 aire fuld zpocevyH. Ibid. p. 33. 

© OvK evovveidntor dia TO pH BEeBaiwe Kar’ évtoAny ovvadpotcecbat. 
Ibid. p. 32. 

f "Oot yap Feod eiciv peta Tob éxtoxérov eiolv. Epist.ad Phil. p. 40. 

5 “Orov dé 0 wouyy éciv, éxet w¢ apdbara dxoAovdeiTe. Ibid. p. 40. 

» Mia Eiyapicta ypyodat év aorapiov. Ibid. p. 40. 

i "Ey Guovachpiov. Ibid. p. 41. 

* Xewpotovijoat dudkovov sic Td wpecbedoar Exel Oeod apeobeiar. 
Ibid. p. 45. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 43 


§ 7. As for the diocess of Trallium, that could be no 
larger than the former ones, since it had but one altar in 
it, which was correlate to its one bishop; so that to sepa- 
rate from the altar was the same as to separate from the 
bishop; whence Ignatius says, that “he that is within 
the altar is pure ;” that is, “ he that doth any thing with- 
out the bishop, priests, and deacons, is impure.” 

Now let any impartial man judge whether all these 
descriptions of those ancient diocesses do not forcibly 
constrain us to reduce them to the rate of our modern 
parishes. And if these were no greater, especially 
Ephesus, at which place St. Paul preached three years, 
we have no reason to imagine that other bishoprics, where 
the apostles never were, or at least never preached so 
long, surmounted their bulk and largeness. 

How long it was before these diocesses swelled mto 
several congregations is not my business to determine, 
since it happened not within my prescribed time ; except 
in the church of Alexandria; the reason and manner 
whereof shall be shown in a few leaves more, after that I 
have more fully evidenced this point, by demonstrating 
that the ereatest bishoprics in the world, even in the third 
century, were no more than so many single congregations: 
and if this can be proved, it is the solidest demonstration 
that can be given: for the larger a church was, and the 
more time it had to settle and increase itself, the greater 
reason have we to expect that it should exceed all others 
in numbers and diffusiveness. 

Now the four greatest diocesses that in those days 
were in the world, are Antioch, Rome, Carthage, and 
Alexandria: the three former of which, during the whole 


ane 2 by , n X\ 7. a9) 2 e S ? 

O évticg Yuctacnpiov dv Kadapd¢ écuv, Todt’ Ecwv, O Ywpi¢g éemt- 
oKéaov Kal TpEeaBuTepiov, Kal dLaKdvov apdoowy TL ov’TOG Od Kavapoc 
éciv TH ovverdjoet. Epist. ad Tralles. p. 50. 


44 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


three hundred years after Christ, never branched them- 
selves into several particular congregations, though the 
latter did, as shall be hereafter shown. 

§ 8. As for the diocess of Antioch, its members were 
not so many, but that two hundred and sixty-five years 
after Christ they were able to meet all in one place, of 
which we have this memorable instance, that when Paulus 
Samosatenus, the heretical bishop thereof, was deprived 
by a synod held in that place, and Domnus substituted in 
his room, “ he refused to resign the church’s house,” till 
the emperor Aurelian forced him to resign “ that house :”> 
so that for above two hundred and fifty years after Christ, 
the whole bishopric of Antioch had but one church to 
serve God in. 

§ 9. How large the diocess of Rome was, may be con- 
jectured by that, 

1. All the people thereof could meet together to perform 
divine service, as appears by that history of a certain con- 
fessor called Natalis, who, returning from the Theodosian 
heresy, put himself into the habit of a penitent, threw 
himself at the feet of the clergy and laity, as they went 
into their public meeting place, and so bewailed his fault, 
“that at length the church was touched with compassion 
toward him.”¢ 

2. In this diocess there was but one church or meet- 
ing place; for when Bishop Anterus died, “ all the brethren 
met together in the church”! to choose a successor; which 


2 Mydaucic éxcavat Tod tHe ExKAnoiac oixov. Apud Euseb. lib. 7, 
cap. 30, p. 282. 

> Tov oixov. Ibid. 

© Tlpooreceiv 7H értoxdaw, KAjpw, AatkOv, THY etomAayxvo ExkAN- 
ciav TH Oejoet Xpnoayevovy. Anonym. apud Euseb. lib. 5, cap. 28, 
p- 197. 

1 ’AdcAgav andvtwy éai tHg éxKAnoiag ovyKeKxpoTnuévov. Apud 
Euseb. lib. 6, cap. 28, p. 229. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 45 


distinction or nomination of place, viz., that they met in 
the church, denotes that they had but one church all; for 
if they had had more churches than one, the historian 
would have left us in the dark as to what church they met 
in, whether in St. James’s, St. John’s, or St. Peter’s. 

3. In this bishopric also they had but one altar or com- 
munion-table, as appears from a passage of Cyprian, who 
describes the schism of Novatian, a presbyter of this 
church, by “ his erecting a profane altar,”* in opposition 
to the altar of Cornelius, his lawful bishop. 

4. The whole diocess could concur together in saluta- 
tions and letters to other churches. Thus concludes a 
letter of the clergy of Rome to the clergy of Carthage, 
“The brethren which are in bonds salute you, and the 
presbyters, and the whole church.” 

5. Whatever letters were written to that church, were 
read before them all, as it was the custom of Bishop Cor- 
nelius “to read all public letters to his most holy and most 
numerous flock.”¢ 

Lastly, the people of this diocess met all together to 
choose a bishop, when the see was vacant. ‘So, upon 
the death of Anterus, “all the brethren met together in 
the church to choose a successor,”? where all the people 
unanimously chose Fabianus. And so, after the death 
of Fabianus, Cornelius was chosen bishop of that diocess 
“by the suffrage of the clergy and people.”¢ 

Now whether all these things put together—whether 


2 Profanum altare erigere. Epist. 67, § 2, p. 198. 

> Salutant vos fratres, qui sunt in vinculis, et presbyteri, et tota ec- 
clesia. Apud Cyprian. Epist. 3, § 3, p. 12. 

© Sanctissime atque amplissimz plebi, legere te semper literas nos- 
tras. Cyprian. Epist. 55, § 21, p. 144. 

4 Tév yap ddeAgdv ardvtwv éni tHe éexkAnoiag ovyKexpoTnuévor, 
Tov mavta Aady. Apud Euseb. lib. 6, cap. 28, p. 229. 

€ Cleri ac plebis suffragio. Cyprian. Epist. 67, § 2, p. 198. 


AG THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


their having but one communion-table in their whole dio- 
cess, as also but one church, where they all usually met ’ 
—do not unavoidably reduce this bishopric to the circum- 
ference of a modern parish, I leave every man to judge. 

§10. The next diocess to be considered is Carthage, 
which, next to Rome and Alexandria,was the greatest city 
in the world, and probably had as many Christians in it 
as either, especially if that is true which Tertullian insi- 
nuates, that the tenth part thereof was Christian ; for he 
remonstrates to Scapula, the persecuting president of that 
city, that “if he should destroy the Christians of Carthage, 
he must root out the tenth part thereof.”* But yet how 
many soever the Christians of that bishopric were, even 
some years after ‘T'ertullian’s days, they were no more in 
number than they are now in our parishes, as is evident 
from scores of passages in the writings of Cyprian, bishop 
of that church. For, 

1. The bishop of that diocess ‘“ could know every one 
therein.”» 

2. The bishop of that diocess was the common curator 
of all the poor therein, relieving the poor and indigent, 
paying off their debts, and aiding the necessitous trades- 
men with money to set up their trades. As Cyprian, 
when he was in his exiled state, sent Caldonius, Hercu- 
lanus, Rogatianus, and Numidicus, to his church at Car- 
thage “to pay off the debts of the indebted members 
thereof, and to help those poor mechanics with a conve- 
nient sum of money who were willing to set up their 
trades.”° If Cyprian’s diocess had consisted of scores of 


@ Quid ipsa Carthago passura est, decimanda a te. Ad Scapulam, 
p- 450. 

> Ut omnes optimé nossem. Cyprian. Epist. 58, § 1, p. 90. 

* Ut expungeretis necessitates fratrum nostrorum sumptibus, si qui 
etiam vellent suas artes exercere, additamento quantum satis esset, 
desideria eorum juvaretis. Idem. ibid. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. A? 


parishes, how many thousand pounds must he have ex- 
pended to have paid off the debts of all the insolvent 
persons therein, and to have assisted every poor trader 
with a sufficient stock to carry on his employment ? 

3. All the diocess was present when the sacrament of 
the Lord’s supper was administered. So saith Cyprian, 
“We celebrate the sacrament, the whole brotherhood be- 
ing present.” 

4. When Celerinus was ordained lector or clerk by 
Cyprian, he read from the pulpit, so that “all the peo- 
ple”> could see and hear him. 

5. In all ordinations all the people were consulted, 
and none were admitted into holy orders without their 
approbation, as is assured by Cyprian, bishop of this dio- 
cess, who tells us that it was his constant custom “ in all 
ordinations to consult his people, and with their common 
counsel to weigh the merits of every candidate of the 
sacred orders.”* And therefore, when for extraordinary 
merits he advanced one to the degree of lector or clerk, 
without first communicating it to his diocess, he writes from 
his exiled state “ to his whole flock the reason of it.’”4 

6. When that see was vacant, all the people met toge- 
ther to choose a bishop. Whence Pontius says, that 
Cyprian was elected bishop of this diocess “ by the favour 
of the people.” And Cyprian himself acknowledges 
that he was chosen by “the suffrage of all his people.”* 


a Sacramentiveritatem fraternitate omni presente celebramus. Epist. 
63, § 12, p. 117. 

> Plebi Universe. LEpist. 34, § 4, p. 82. 

© Tn ordinationibus clericis, fratres charissimi, solemus vos ante con- 
sulere, et mores ac merita singulorum communi consilio ponderare. 
Epist. 33 ad Clerum et Plebem, p. 76. 

4 Plebi Universe. Epist. 34, p. 80. 

© Plebis favore. In Vita Cypriani. 

f Populi universi suffragio. Epist. 55, § 7, p. 139. 


48 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


7. All the people of this diocess could meet together 
to send letters to other churches; an instance whereof 
we have in that gratulatory letter still extant by Cyprian, 
which they “all sent to Lucius, bishop of Rome, on his 
return from exile.” 

8. All the people were present at church censures, 
and concurred at the “‘ excommunication of offenders.”> 
Thus Cyprian, writing from his exile to the people of this 
his diocess, about the irregularities of two of his sub-dea- 
cons, and one of his acolyths, and about the schism of 
Felicissimus, assures them, that as to the former, when- 
ever it should please God to return him in peace, “it 
should be determined by him and his colleagues, and his 
whole flock.”« And as to the latter, that then likewise 
that should be transacted ‘“ according to the abitrement of 
the people, and the common counsel of them all.”4 

9. At the absolution of penitents all the people were 
present, who examined the reality of the offenders’ re- 
pentance, and, if well satisfied of it, consented that they 
should be admitted to the church’s peace. Therefore, 
when some presbyters, in a time of persecution, had, with 
too great rashness and precipitancy, assailed some of those 
that through the violence of the persecution had suc- 
cumbed, Cyprian writes them from his exile an objugatory 
letter, commanding them to admit no more till peace should 
be restored to the church, when those offenders should 
plead their cause “ before all the people.”* And touching 


~ 


4 Vicarias vero pro nobis ego et college, et fraternitas omnis has ad 
vos literas mittimus. Apud Cyprian. Epist. 58, § 2, p. 163. 

> Secundum vestra divina suffragia conjurati. Epist. 4 ad Plebem, 
§ 1, p. 92. 

¢ Et cum plebe ipsa universa. Epist. 28, § 2, p. 64. 

4 Secundum arbitrium quoque vestrum, et omnium nostrim commune 
consilium. Epist. 40 ad Plebem, § 7, p. 94. 

© Acturi apud Plebem universam causam suam. Epist. 10, § 7, p. 30. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 49 


the same matter he writes in another place to all the peo- 
ple of his diocess, that when it should please God to 
restore peace to the church, then all those matters “ should 
be examined in their presence, and be judged by them.”* 

Lastly, nothing was done in the diocess without the 
consent of the people. So resolved Bishop Cyprian: 
“ From the first time | was made bishop,” said he, “I 
determined to do nothing without the consent of my peo- 
ple.”» And accordingly, when he was exiled from his 
flock, he wrote to the clergy and laity thereof, that when 
it should please God to return him unto them, “all affairs, 
as their mutual honour did require, should be debated in 
common by them.”¢ 

Now whether all these observations do not evidently 
reduce the diocess of Carthage to the same bulk with our 
parishes, I leave to every one to determine: for my part 
I must needs profess, that I cannot imagine how all the 
people thereof could receive the sacrament together, assist 
at the excommunication and absolution of offenders, assem- 
ble together to elect their bishop, and do the rest of those 
fore-mentioned particulars, without confining this bishopric 
within the limits of a particular congregation. 

§ 11. As for the diocess of Alexandria, though the 
numbers of the Christians therein were not so many, but 
that in the middle of the fourth century they could all, or 
at least most of them, meet together in one place, as I 
might evince from the writings of Athanasius,‘ were it not 
beyond my prescribed time ; yet in the third century they 


a Examinabuntur singula presentibus et judicantibus vobis. Epist. 
12 ad Plebem, § 1, p. 30. 

» A primordio episcopatus mei statueram nihil sine consensu plebis 
mee privata sententia gerere. Epist. 6, $5, p. 17. 

¢ De iis que vel gesta sunt, vel gerenda, sicut honor mutuus poscit, 
in commune tractabimus. Epist. 6, § 5, p. 17. 

4 Apolog. ad Constant. 

3 


50 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


had divided themselves into several distinct and separate 
congregations, which were all subjected to one bishop, as 
is clearly enough asserted by Dionysius, bishop of this 
church, who mentions “the distinct congregations in the 
extremest suburbs of the city.”* The reason whereof 
seems to be this: those members of this bishopric who 
lived in the remotest parts of it, finding it incommodious 
and troublesome every Lord’s day, Saturday, Wednesday, 
and Friday, (on which days they always assembled,) to 
go to their one usual meeting place, which was very far 
from their own homes; and withal being unwilling to 
divide themselves from their old church and bishop, lest 
they should seem guilty of the detestable sin of schism, 
which consisted in a causeless separation from their bishop 
and parish church, as shall be hereafter shown, desired 
their proper bishop to give them leave, for conveniency 
sake, to erect near their own habitations a chapel of ease, 
which should be a daughter church to the bishop’s, under 
his jurisdiction, and guided by a presbyter of his com- 
mission and appointment, whereat they would usually 
meet, though on some solemn occasions they would still 
all assemble in one church with their one bishop. 

That for this reason these separate congregations were 
introduced at Alexandria, seems evident enough ; because 
Dionysius-Alexandrinus saith, that these distinct congre- 
gations were only in the “remotest suburbs ;”» and the 
Christians hereof were not as yet arrived to those great 
numbers but that seventy years after they could meet all 
together in one and the same place, as might be proved 
from that fore-mentioned place of Athanasius. 

So that these distinct congregations were only for the 
conveniency and ease of those who lived at a great dis- 

a "Ev mpoaceioug moppwrépw Kewuévolg Kata pépoc EoovTat ovvaywyat. 
Advers. Germanum apud Euseb. lib. 7, cap. 11, p. 260. 

> "Ev apoaceiotc Toppwtépw Kemmevorc. Vide ut antea. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 51 


tance from the bishop’s church, being introduced in the 
third century, and peculiar to the bishopric of Alexandria: 
all other bishoprics confining themselves within their 
primitive bounds of a single congregation, as we have 
before proved the largest of them did; even Antioch, 
Rome, and Carthage. 

§ 12. If then a bishopric was but a single congregation, 
it is no marvel that we find bishops not only in cities, 
but in country villages; there being a bishop constituted 
wherever there were believers enough to form a compe- 
tent congregation ; “ for,” says Clemens Romanus, “ the 
apostles going forth and preaching both in country and city, 
constituted bishops and deacons there.”* Much to which 
purpose Cyprian says, that “bishops were ordained 
throughout all provinces and cities :”* hence in the encyc- 
lical epistle of the synod of Antioch it is said, that Paulus 
Samosatenus had many flatterers ‘“ among the adjacent 
city and country bishops ;”¢ of this sort of country bishops 
was Zoticus, bishop “of the village of Comane.”4 And 
we may reasonably believe that many of those bishops 
who, in the year 258 were assembled at Carthage to the 
number of fourscore and seven, had no other than obscure 
villages for their seats, since we find not the least notice 
of them in Ptolemy, or any of the old geographers. 

§ 13. But let the bishops’ seats have been in any place 
whatever, their limits, as hath been proved, exceeded not 

a Kara yopac ovv Kai réAeice knptoocovtes Kadicavoy ele éri- 
oKoroug Kai OLtakévoucg. Epist. 1 ad Corinth. p. 54. 

b Per omnes provincias, et per urbes singulas ordinati sunt episcopi. 
Epist. 52, § 10, p. 119. 

© "Ervoxéroue Tv Ou6pwr dyp@v Te kai TéAewv. Apud Euseb. lib. 
7, cap. 30, p. 281. 

4 Zotixov ard Koudvyc xounc. Anonym. apud Euseb. lib. 5, cap. 
16, p. 182. 

* Concil. Carthag. apud Cyprian. p. 443. 





52 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


those of our modern parishes. I do not here mean, as 
was said before, that the territory of some of them was no 
larger; no, I readily grant that; for it is very probable 
that in those places where there were but few believers, 
the Christians, for several miles round, met all together at 
the greatest place within that compass, where, probably, 
there were most Christians, whence both the church and 
its bishop took their denomination from that place where 
they so assembled. But this is what I mean, that there 
were no more Christians in that bishopric than there are 
now in our ordinary parishes ; and that the believers of 
that whole territory met all together, with their bishop, 
for the performance of religious services. 

Thus it was in the age and country of Justin Martyr ; 
who, describing their solemn assemblies, writes, that “on 
Sunday all the inhabitants, both of city and country, met 
together, where the lector read some portions of the Holy 
Scriptures ; and the bishop preached unté them, adminis- 
tered the eucharist, and sent by the deacons part of the 
consecrated elements to those that were absent.”* So that 
the inhabitants, both of city and country, assembled all at 
the bishop’s church; hearing him, and communicating 
with him: following herein the exhortation of St. Ignatius 
to the Magnesians, “ Let nothing,” saith he, “be in you 
that may divide you; but be united to the bishop and those 
that preside over you. As, therefore, our Lord Jesus 
Christ did nothing without his Father, neither by himself 
nor his apostles, so do you nothing without the bishop and 
presbyters, but assemble into one place, and have one 
prayer, one supplication, one mind, and one hope.”» 


a TH Tov HAiov Aeyouévy HUépa TAaVTwY KaTa TOAELC 7 GypOvS MEVOV- 
Tar él TO aVTO ovvéhevote yiveTaL—é Bpoécwe dia Adyov THY vove- 
ciay oveitat éreita Gproc mpoodgépeTat, Kai 6 mpoEca¢ evyacg ava- 
méuTeL—kKal Tol¢ ov Tapovor Ola THY diakévwr Téurrerat. Apol. 2, p. 98. 


b Mydév écw év tyiv 0 duvgcetar tude pepicat GAN é&vOOnTE TY 


—— 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 53 


CHAPTER III. 


§ 1. What the bishop’s office was. 42. Always resident on his cure. 
§ 3. How the bishop was chosen, elected, or presented by the majority 
of the parish. § 4. Approved by the neighbouring bishops. 4 5. In- 
stalled by imposition of hands. How many bishops necessary to this 
instalment. § 6. When a bishop was promoted, he certified it to 
other bishops. 4§ 7. A brief recapitulation of the peculiar acts of the 
bishop. 


§1. Tue bishop’s flock having been so largely dis- 
cussed, it will now be necessary to speak something of 
the bishop’s duty toward them, and of the several particu- 
lars of his honourable office. I shall not here be tedious, 
since about this there is no great difference ; only briefly 
enumerate the several actions belonging to his charge. 

In brief, therefore, the peculiar acts of his function were 
such as these: viz., preaching the word,* praying with 
his people,” administering the two sacraments of bap- 
tism,° and the Lord’s supper,‘ taking care of the poor,® 
ordaining of ministers,‘ governing his flock, excommuni- 
cating of offenders, absolving of penitents; and, in a 
word, whatever acts can be comprised under those three 
general heads of preaching, worship, and government, were 
part of the bishop’s function and office. 

I have but just named these things, because they are 


ETLOKOT@, Kal Tog TpoKAadnuévotc—HoreEp ovv KbpLog dvEv TOD TaTPOE 
ovdéev éxoinae 7vamevog Ov, ovte dv’ EavTod, ovTE dia TOV arocéAwr, 
otTwg pndé tyueig dvev Tob éExtoKdmoV Kal TOV TpEecBuTépwv pNdev 
TPaooerTe Gan eri TO AUTO pia TpocEevyy, pia dénotc, Eig vode, pia - 
éAric. Epist. ad Magnes. p. 33. 
a Origen. in Ezekiel. Hom. 3. ° Justin. Martyr. Apol. 2, p. 98. 
© Tertul. de Baptism. p. 602. 4 Idem. de Coron. Milit. p. 338. 
e Justin. Martyr. Apol. 2, p. 99. 
f Firmilian. apud Cypr. Epist. 75, § 6, p. 237. 
g Tertul. Apol. cap. 39, p. 709. h Cypr. Epist. 36, § 2, p. 90. 
i Idem. Epist. 10, § 2, p. 30. 





54 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


not much controverted; and my design leads me chiefly 
to the consideration of those matters which have been un- 
happily disputed among us. 

§ 2. To the constant discharge of those fore-mentioned 
actions did the primitive bishops sedulously apply them- 
selves, continually preaching unto their people, praying with 
them, and watching ever them; and, to that end, residing 
always with them: which incumbency orresidency on their 
parishes was deemed so necessary, that Cyprian, enumer- 
ating the sins that brought the wrath of God upon the 
churches in that bloody persecution of Decius, mentions 
the bishops’ non-residencies as one—“ their leaving their 
rectories, and deserting their flocks, and wandering about 
the country to hunt after worldly gain and advantage ;”* 
and, therefore, the said Cyprian, writing to the Roman 
confessors who were inveigled into the schism of Nova- 
tian, tells them, “ that since he could not leave his church 
and come in person unto them,”” therefore, by his letters, 
he most earnestly exhorted them to quit that schismatical 
faction: so that he looked on his obligation of residency 
at his church to be so binding, as that in no case almost 
could he warrant his leaving of it; which determination 
of his might be the more fixed and peremptory, because 
that not long before he was so severely taxed by the Ro- 
man clergy,° and by many of his own parish,‘ for depart- 
ing from them for a while, though it was to avoid the fury 
of his persecutors, who had already proscribed him, and 
would have executed him as a malefactor, had he not, by 
that recess from his church, escaped their murderous hand. 


a Episcopi derelicta cathedra, plebe deserta, per alienas provincias 
oberrantes, negotiationis questuose nundinas aucupari. De Lapsis, § 4, 
p. 278. 

> Nos ecclesia derelicta, foras exire, et ad vos venire non possumus. 
Epist. 44, § 2, p. 102. 

¢ Epist. 3 apud Cyprian. p. 11. 4 Pontius in Vita Cypriani. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 55 


So that the primitive apostolic bishops constantly re- 
sided with their flocks, conscientiously applying them- 
selves, with the utmost diligence and industry, to the 
promotion of the spiritual welfare of those that were 
committed to their trust; employing themselves in all acts 
of piety and offices of charity ; so leading a laborious and 
mortified life, till either a natural or a violent death re- 
moved them from earth to heaven, where they were made 
priests to the Most High, and were infinitely remunerated 
for all their pains and sorrows; and so leaving their par- 
ticular flocks on earth to be fed and governed by others 
who should succeed them in their places; which brings 
me in the next place to inquire, how a vacant bishopric 
was supplied, or in what manner a bishop or minister was 
elected to a diocess or parish. 

§ 3. Now the manner of electing a bishop I find to be 
thus: When a parish or bishopric was vacant through the 
death of the incumbent, all the members of that parish, 
both clergy and laity, met together in the church, com- 
monly to choose a fit person for his successor, to whom 
they might commit the care and government of their 
church. 

Thus, when Alexander was chosen bishop of Jerusalem, 
it was by the “compulsion or choice of the members 
of that church.”* And as for the bishopric of Rome, 
we have a memorable instance of this kind in the ad- 
vancement of Fabianus to that see upon the death of 
Bishop Anterus. “ All the people met together in the 
church to choose a successor, proposing several illustrious . 
and eminent personages as fit for that office ; whilst no one 
so much as thought upon Fabianus then present, till a 
dove miraculously came and sate upon his head, in the 


a *AdeAgol obKér’ oiKade a’TO Tadvoceiv éaitpéxovet. Euseb. lib. 
6, cap. 11, p. 312. 


56 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


same manner as the Holy Ghost formerly descended on 
our Saviour; and then all the people, guided as it were 
with one divine Spirit, cried out with one mind and soul, 
that Fabianus was worthy of the bishopric: and so straight- 
ways taking him, they placed him on the episcopal 
throne.”* And as Fabianus, so likewise his successor 
Cornelius ‘“ was elected by the suffrage of the clergy and 
laity.’ 

Thus also with respect to the diocess of Carthage, 
Cyprian was chosen bishop thereof by its inhabitants 
and members, as Pontius, his deacon, writes, “ that though 
he was a novice, yet, by the grace of God and the favour 
of the people, he was elevated to that sublime dignity,”¢ 
which is no more than what Cyprian himself acknow- 
ledges, who frequently owns that he was promoted to that 
honourable charge by the “suffrage of the people.”¢ 

§ 4. When the people had thus elected a bishop, they 
presented him to the neighbouring bishops for their approba- 
tion and consent, because, without their concurrent assent, 
there could be no bishop legally instituted or confirmed. 


a Tév yap ddeAdav ardvtwr yelpotoviag Evexev THE TOU méAAoVTOS 
dvadeséicSai THv éxtoKoTHy Ext THe EKKAHOIiaG OVYKEKPOTHPLEVOV, TAEio- 
Tov Te éexidavdv Kal évddfov avdpwv Toic ToAAoI¢ év brovoia trap- 
xovTwov, 6 PaBiavdce rapdv obdevog piv av¥paruv ei¢ didvolay jet, 
duoc 0 obv aUpiwe éx weTeOpov TEepicepay KaTanTdoay ExixatverdHvat 
Th avTod Kedaay uvyjuovetovor, pivnua éevdetkvupevny Tho etl TOV Ow- 
Thpa Tod dyiov mvevuatoc év elder TEpicepac KadOdoD, Ed’ © TOV TaVTA 
Aadv Sorep 6° Evie rvetuaTtog Veiov KivndévTa Oudce, Tpodvpia aon 
kai pd woyn asvov éexibojoar Kai apeAdHtwg eri Tov Opovoy Tig ért- 
oxoric AaBdévtac avrov éxude_etvat. Euseb. lib. 6, cap. 28, p. 229. 
Cleri ac plebis suffragio ordinato. Cyprian. 





» Episcopo Cornelio 
Epist. 67, § 2, p. 198. 

¢ Judicio Dei, et plebis favore ad officium sacerdotii, et episcopatus 
gradum, adhuc neophytus electus est. In Vita Cypriani. 

¢ Populi universi suffragio. Epist. 55, § 7, p. 139. Populi suffragi- 
um. Epist. 55, § 6, p. 138. Suffragium vestrum. Epist. 40, 9 1, 
p: 92. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 57 


Thus when the fore-mentioned Alexander was chosen 
bishop of Jerusalem by the brethren of that place, he had 
also the “ common consent of the circumjacent bishops.”* 
Now the reason of this, I suppose, was, lest the people, 
through ignorance or affection, should choose an unfit or 
an unable man for that sacred office ; it being supposed 
that a synod of bishops had more wisdom, learning, and 
prudence, than a congregation of unlearned and ignorant 
men, and so were better able to judge of the abilities and 
qualifications of the person elect than the people were. 
Hence we find, that sometimes the election of a bishop is 
attributed to the choice of the neighbouring bishops, with 
the consent and suffrage of the people: this custom gene- 
rally prevailed throughout Africa, where, upon the vacancy 
of a see, “ the neighbouring bishops of the province met 
together at that church, and chose a bishop in the pre- 
sence of the people, who knew his life and conversation 
before ; which custom was observed in the election of 
Sabinus, bishop of Emerita, in Spain, who was advanced 
to that dignity by the suffrage of all the brethren, and of 
all the bishops there present.”» But whether the election 
of a bishop be ascribed to the adjoining ministers, or to 
the people of that parish, it comes all to one and the same 
thing; neither the choice of the bishops of the voisinage 
without the consent of the people, nor the election of the 
people without the approbation of those bishops, was suf- 


a Todto dé xpdsaytec peta Kowijg TOV éwLOKODY Oi Tac TELE Leto 
éxkAnoiag yvounc. Euseb. lib. 6, cap. 11, p. 212. 

> Apud nos, et fere per provincias universas tenetur, ut ad ordinatio- 
nes rité celebrandas, ad eam plebem cui prepositus ordinatur, episcopi 
ejusdem provincie proximi quique conveniant, et episcopus deligatur, 
plebe presente, que singulorum vitam plenissimé novit, et uniuscujus- 
que actum de ejus conversatione perspexit. Quod factum videmus in 
Sabini ordinatione, ut de universe fraternitatis suffragio, et de episcopo- 
rum judicio episcopatus ei deferretur. Synod. African. apud Cyprian. 
Epist. 68, § 6, p. 202. 

3+ 


58 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


ficient and valid of itself; but both concurred to a legal 
and orderly promotion, which was according to the exam- 
ple of the apostles and apostolic preachers, who, in the 
first plantation of the churches, “ ordained bishops and 
deacons with the consent of the whole church.”* 

§ 5. A bishop being thus elected and confirmed, the 
next thing that followed was his ordination or instalment, 
which was done in his own church by the neighbouring 
bishops ; as Cyprian mentions some bishops in his time, 
who went to a “ city called Capse to install a bishop,”® 
whither, when they were come, they took the bishop 
elect, and, in the presence of his flock, ordained or in- 
stalled him bishop of that church, by imposition of hands, 
as Sabinus was “placed in his bishopric by imposition 
of hands.”« Therefore Fortunatus, the schismatical bi- 
shop of Carthage, “ got five bishops to come and ordain 
him at Carthage :”4 and so Novatian, when he schisma- 
tically aspired to the bishopric of Rome, that he might 
not seem to leap in uncanonically, “ wheedled three igno- 
rant and simple bishops to come to Rome and install him 
in that bishopric by imposition of hands.”¢ 

How many bishops were necessary to this installing of 
a bishop elect I find not; three were sufficient, as is ap- 


2 Karacavévtac tr’ éxeivov 7 weTakv vo’ Etépwv EAdoyipwv avdpar 
ovvevdoknodone tig éxkAnoiag mdong. Clem. Roman. Epist. 1 ad 
Corinth. p. 57. 

> In Capsensi civitate propter ordinationem episcopi essetis. Epist. 
53, § 1, p. 131. 

¢ Episcopatus ei deferretur, et manus ei imponerentur. Apud Cyp. 
Epist. 68, § 6, p. 202. 

@ Quinque pseudo-episcopi Carthaginem venerint, et Fortunatum sibi 
dementie sue socium constituerint. Cyprian. Epist.55, § 12, p. 140. 

© "Eaoxérove tpeic avbparove aypoixovg Kai dadovcdtove whacyH 
Tivl éwiyerphjoer ELawathoy peta Biacg nvadyKacev elkoviKh TLvi Kat 
pataia yeiperidecia Erioxorynv avtS dovvat. Cornel. apud Euseb. 
lib. 6, cap. 43, p. 243. 





THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 59 


parent from the fore-cited action of Novatian; whether 
less would do, I know not, since I find not the least foot- 
steps of it in my antiquity, unless that from Novatian’s 
sending for, and fetching just three bishops out of Italy, we 
conclude that number to be necessary. 

But if there were more than three, it was not accounted 
unnecessary or needless ; for the more bishops there were 
present at an instalment, the more did its validity and un- 
exceptionableness appear: whence Cyprian argues the 
undeniable legality of Cornelius’s promotion to the see of 
Rome, because he had “ sixteen bishops present at his 
ordination :’* and for this reason it was that Fortunatus, 
the schismatical bishop of Carthage, falsely boasted that 
there were “twenty-five bishops present at his instal- 
ment.”* And thus, in short, we have viewed the method 
of the ancients in their election of bishops; we have 
shown that they were elected by the people, approved and 
installed by the neighbouring bishops ; on which account 
it is that Cyprian calls them “ chosen and ordained.”* 

§ 6. It may not now be amiss to mention this custom, 
that when a bishop was thus presented and advanced to a 
see, he immediately gave notice of it to other bishops, 
especially to the most renowned bishops and bishoprics, 
as Cornelius wrote to Cyprian, bishop of Carthage, an 
account of his being promoted to the see of Rome ;* be- 
twixt which two churches there was such a peculiar in- 
tercourse and harmony, as that this custom was more 
particularly observed by them, insomuch that it was ob- 


a Episcopo in ecclesia 4 sexdecim coepiscopis facto. Epist. 52, § 16, 
p- 119. 

> Jactare viginti quinque episcopos affuisse. Cyprian. Epist. 55, 
§ 12, p. 140. 

© Delecti, ordinati. Epist. 41, § 2, p. 97. 

4 Tu te episcopum factum literis nunciares. Cyprian. Epist. 42, 
§ 4, p. 99. 


60 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


served by the schismatical bishops of each church, Nova- 
tian giving notice to Cyprian, bishop of Carthage, of his 
promotion to the church of Rome,* and Fortunatus advis- 
ing Cornelius, bishop of Rome, of his advancement to the 
church of Carthage.» 

§ 7. Let what hath been spoken now suffice for the pe- 
culiar acts of the bishop: we have proved that there was 
but one bishop to a church, and one church to a bishop ; 
we have shown the bishop’s office and function, election 
and ordination; what further to add on this head I know 
not: for as for those other acts which he performed jointly 
with his flock, we must refer them to another place, till 
we have handled those other matters which previously 
propose themselves unto us. The first of which will be 
an examination into the office and order of a presbyter, 
which, because it will be somewhat long, shall be the 
subject of the following chapter. 


CHAPTER IV. 


§ 1. The definition and description of a presbyter; what he was. 
) 2. Inferior to a bishop in degree: § 3. But equal to a bishop in 
order. § 4. The reason why there were many presbyters ina church. 
§ 5. Presbyters not necessary to the constitution of a church. 4 6. 
When presbyters began. 


§ 1. Ir will be both needless and tedious to endea- 
vour to prove that the ancients generally mention pres- 
byters distinct from bishops. Every one, I suppose, 
will readily own and acknowledge it. The great question 


a Venerunt ad nos missi a Novatiano maximus presbyter, &c. 
Cyprian. Epist. 41, § 1, p. 96. 
> Ad te legatia Fortunato missi. Idem. Epist. 55, § 18, p. 143. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 61 


which hath most deplorably sharpened and soured the 
minds of too many is, what the office and order of a pres- 
byter was: about this the world hath been, and still is, 
most uncharitably divided; some equalize a presbyter in 
every thing with a bishop; others as much debase him ; 
each, according to their particular opinions, either advance 
or degrade him. In many controversies a middle way 
hath been the safest; perhaps in this, the medium be- 
tween the two extremes may be the truest: whether what 
I am now going to say be the true state of the matter, I 
leave to the learned reader to determine. I may be de- 
ceived: neither my years nor abilities exempt me from 
mistakes and errors: but this I must needs say, that 
after the most diligent researches, and impartialest inqui- 
ries, the following notion seems to me most plausible, and 
most consentaneous to truth, and which, with a great facility 
and clearness, solves those doubts and objections which, 
according to those other hypotheses, I know not how to 
answer. But yet, however, I am not so wedded and 
bigoted to this opinion, but if any shall produce better, 
and more convincing arguments to the contrary, I will not 
contentiously defend, but readily relinquish it, since I 
search after truth, not to promote a particular party or 
interest. 

Now, for the better explication of this point, I shall first 
lay down a definition and description of a presbyter, and 
then prove the parts thereof. 

Now the definition of a presbyter may be this: a per- 
son in holy orders, having thereby an inherent right to 
perform the whole office of a bishop ; but being possessed 
of no place or parish, not actually discharging it, without 
the permission and consent of the bishop of a place or 
parish. 

But lest this definition should seem obscure, I shall 
illustrate it by the following instance: as a curate hath 


62 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


the same mission and power with a minister whose 
place he supplies, yet, being not the minister of that place, 
he cannot perform there any acts of his ministerial func- 
tion without leave from the minister thereof: so a pres- 
byter had the same order and power with a bishop whom 
he assisted in his cure; yet being not the bishop or minis- 
ter of that cure, he could not there perform any parts of 
his pastoral office without the permission of the bishop 
thereof; so that what we generally render bishops, priests, 
and deacons, would be more intelligible in our tongue 
if we did express it by rectors, vicars, and deacons ; by 
rectors understanding the bishops; and by vicars the 
presbyters ; the former being the actual incumbents of a 
place, and the latter curates or assistants, and so different 
in degree, but yet equal in order. 

Now this is what I understand by a presbyter; for the 
confirmation of which these two things are to be proved: 

I. That the presbyters were the bishops’ curates and 
assistants, and so inferior to them in the actual exercise 
of their ecclesiastical commission. 

II. That yet, notwithstanding, they had the same in- 
herent right with the bishops, and so were not of a distinct 
specific order from them. Or, more briefly, thus: 

1. That the presbyters were different from the bishops 
in gradu, or indegree ; but yet, 

2. They were equal to them zn ordine, or in order. 

§ 2. As to the first of these; that presbyters were but 
the bishops’ curates and assistants, inferior to them in 
degree, or in the actual discharge of their ecclesiastical 
commission. This will appear to have been, in effect, 
already proved, if we recollect what has been asserted 
touching the bishop and his office, that there was but one 
bishop in a church; that he usually performed all the 
parts of divine service; that he was the general disposer 
and manager of all things within his diocess, there being 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 63 


nothing done there without his consent and approbation : 
to which we may particularly add, 

1. That without the bishop’s leave a presbyter could 
not baptize: thus saith Tertullian: “ The bishop hath the 
right of baptizing, then the presbyters, and deacons, but 
yet, for the honour of the church, not without the authority 
of the bishop ;”* and to the same effect saith Ignatius, “ It 
is not lawful for any one to baptize except the bishop 
permit him.» 

2. Without the bishop’s permission, a presbyter could 
not administer the Lord’s supper. “ That eucharist,” 
says Ignatius, “is only valid, which is performed by the 
bishop, or by whom he shall permit; for it is not lawful 
for any one to celebrate the eucharist without leave from 
the bishop.”¢ 

3. Without the bishop’s consent a presbyter could not 
preach ; and when he did preach, he could not choose his 
own subject, but discoursed on those matters which were 
enjomed him by the bishop, as “ the bishop commanded 
Origen to preach about the witch of Endor.’’4 

4. Without the bishop’s permission a presbyter could 
not absolve offenders, therefore Cyprian “ severely chides 
some of his presbyters because they dared, in his absence, 
without his consent and leave, to give the church’s peace 
to some offending criminals.”¢ 





a Baptismum dandi habet jus episcopus, dehinc presbyteri et 
diaconi, non tamen sine episcopi auctoritate propter ecclesie honorem. 
De Baptism. p. 602. 

> Ovik« édv écww yupi¢c Tod éxtoKdrov ovTe Bamrtiverv. Epist. ad 
Smyrn. p. 6. 

© Exeivy BeBaia ebyapicia jyeioSw 7 Ind Tov EwioKxowor ova, } Y 
dv abroc éxitpéy obk bfov écw yopic Tad éexioxérov aydryy ToLeiv. 
Ibidem. p. 6. 

4 Ta éni tie éyyacpydbov, ojo, eeraléodw. Homil. de Enga- 
strim. p. 28, vol. 1. 

¢ Aliqui de presbyteris, nec evangelii, nec loci sui memores, sed ne- 


64 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


But what need I reckon up particulars, when in general 
there was no ecclesiastical office performed by the pres- 
byters, without the consent and permission of the bishop: 
so says Ignatius: ‘“ Let nothing be done of ecclesiastical 
concerns without the bishop ;”* for “ whosoever doth any 
thing without the knowledge of the bishop, is a worship- 
per of the devil.” 

Now had the presbyters had an equal power in the go- 
vernment of those churches wherein they lived, how could 
it have been impudent and usurping in them to have per- 
formed the particular acts of their ecclesiastical function 
without the bishop’s leave and consent? No; it was not 
fit or just that any one should preach or govern in a parish 
without the permission of the bishop or pastor thereof; for 
where churches had been regularly formed under the 
jurisdiction of their proper bishops, it had been an unac- 
countable impudence, and a most detestable act of schism 
for any one, though never so legally ordained, to have 
entered those parishes, and there to have performed 
ecclesiastical administrations, without the permission of, 
or, which is all one, in defiance to the bishops or ministers 
thereof; for though a presbyter, by his ordination, had as 
ample an inherent right and power to discharge all cleri- 
cal offices as any bishop in the world had, yet peace, 
unity, and order obliged him not to invade that part of 
God’s church which was committed to another man’s 
care, without that man’s approbation and consent. 


que futurum domini judicium, neque nunc sibi prepositum episcopum 
cogitantes, quod nunquam omnino sub antecessoribus factum est, cum 
contumelia et contemptu prepositi totumsibi vendicent. Epist. 10, § 1, 
p: 29. Vide etiam Epist. 11, § 1, p. 32. et Epist. 12, § 1, p. 37. 

2 Mndeic ywpic Tov éxtoKdwov Ti TpaccETH TOV UVYNKOYTWY Ei¢ THY 
éxkAnoiav. Epist. ad Smyrn. p. 6. 

>'O AdOpa éntoxérov Ti mpdcowv TH diaBdAw AaTpever. Idem. 
ibid. p. 7. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 65 


So then in this sense a presbyter was inferior to a 
bishop in degree, in that having no parish of his own, he 
could not actually discharge the particular acts of his 
ministerial function without leave from the bishop of a 
parish or diocess: the bishops were superior to the pres- 
byters in that they were the presented, instituted, and in- 
ducted ministers of their respective parishes; and the 
presbyters were inferior to the bishops in that they were 
but their curates and assistants. 

§ 3. But though the presbyters were thus different from 
the bishops in degree, yet they were of the very same spe- 
cific order with them, having the same inherent right to 
perform those ecclesiastical offices which the bishop did, 
as will appear from these three arguments : 

1. That by the bishop’s permission they discharged all 
those offices which a bishop did. 2. That they were 
called by the same titles and appellations as the bishops 
were: and, 3. That they are expressly said to be of the 
same order with the bishops. As to the first of these— 
that by the bishop’s permission they discharged all those 
offices which a bishop did—this will appear from that, 

1. When the bishop ordered them, they preached. 
Thus Origen, in the beginning of some of his sermons, 
tells us, that he was commanded thereunto by the bishop, 
as particularly when he preached about the witch of En- 
dor he says, “ the bishop commanded him to do it.” 

2. By the permission of the bishop presbyters baptized. 
Thus writes Tertullian: “The bishop has the right of 
baptizing, and then the presbyters, but not without his 
leave.”» 

3. By the leave of the bishop, presbyters administered 


aTa wepl tie éyacpiubSov, dhow, éeraléoSw. Hom. de Engastrim. 
p- 28, vol. 1. 

> Baptismum dandi habet jus episcopus, dehinc presbyteri et diaconi, 
non tamen sine episcopiauctoritate. De Baptism. p. 602. 


66 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


the eucharist, as must be supposed in that saying of Iena- 
tius, that “that eucharist only was valid which was cele- 
brated by the bishop, or by one appointed by him; and 
that the eucharist could not be delivered but by the bishop, 
or by one whom he did approve.”* 

4. The presbyters ruled in those churches to which 
they belonged, else this exhortation of Polycarpus to the 
presbyters of Philippi would have been in vain: “ Let the 
presbyters be tender and merciful, compassionate toward 
all, reducing those that are in errors, visiting all that are 
weak, not negligent of the widow and the orphan, and him 
that is poor; but ever providing what is honest in the 
sight of God and men; abstaining from all wrath, respect 
of persons, and unrighteous judgment; being far from co- 
vetousness, not hastily believing a report against any man, 
not rigid in judgment, knowing that we are all faulty, and 
obnoxious to judgment.”» Hence, 

5. They presided in church consistories together with 
the bishop, and composed the executive part of the eccle- 
siastical court; from whence it was called the presbytery, 
because in it, as Tertullian says, “approved elders did 
preside.”¢ 

6. They had also the power of excommunication, as 
Rogatianus and Numidicus,‘ two presbyters of Cyprian’s 
church, by his order, joined with some bishops of his 
nomination in the excommunication of certain schismatics 
of his diocess. But of both these two heads more will be 
spoken in another place. 


a Exeivy Bebaia evyapicia nyeiodw 7 bT6 Tov éioxoToY ovaad, } @ 
dy avrog éritpéyn ovK éfov ésty Ywpi¢c TOU ExloKOTOV ayaTyY TOL- 
eiv, UAW Ov av éexeivocg dokysdoyn. Epist. ad Smyrn. p. 6. 

b Epist. ad Philip. § 5. Thus translated by Dr. Cave, in the Life 
of St. Polycarp, p. 127. 

¢ Probati president seniores. Apol. cap. 39, p. 709. 


@ Vid. Cyprian. Epist. 38, et 39, pp. 90 et 92. 





THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 67 


7. Presbyters restored returning penitents tothe church’s 
peace. ‘Thus we read in an epistle of Dionysius, bishop 
of Alexandria, that a certain offender called Serapion, 
approaching to the time of his dissolution, “sent for one 
of the presbyters to absolve him, which the presbyter did, 
according to the order of his bishop, who had before com- 
manded that the presbyters should absolve those who were 
in danger of death.”* 

8. Presbyters confirmed, as we shall most evidently 
prove when we come to treat of confirmation: only re- 
mark here, by the way, that in the days of Cyprian there 
was a hot controversy whether those that were baptized 
by heretics, and came over to the catholic church, should 
be received as members thereof by baptism and confirm- 
ation, or by confirmation alone. Now I would fain know 
whether, during the vacancy of a see, or the bishop’s ab- 
sence, which sometimes might be very long, as Cyprian 
was absent two years, a presbyter could not admit a re- 
turning heretic to the peace and unity of the church, 
especially if we consider their positive damnation of 
all those that died out of the church? If the presbyters 
had not had this power of confirmation, many penitent 
souls must have been damned for the unavoidable default 
of a bishop, which is too cruel and unjust to imagine. 

9. As for ordination, I find but little said of this in 
antiquity ; yet, as little as there is, there are clearer proofs 
of the presbyters’ ordaining than there are of their admin- 
istering the Lord’s supper. “ All power and grace,” saith 
Firmilian, “is constituted in the church, where seniors 
preside, who have the power of baptizing, confirming, and 
ordaining ;”» or, as it may be rendered, and perhaps more 


a Tév-rpecButépwv pol Tivad KadAeoov évrornc dt bn’ éuod dedo- 
pévne Toig amaddatropévore TOV 6iov agveaSat. Ad Fabium Antioch. 
apud Euseb. lib. 6, cap. 44, p. 246. 

> Omnis potestas et gratia in ecclesia constituta sit ubi president 





68 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


agreeable to the sense of the place, “ who had the power 
as of baptizing, so also of confirming and ordaining.” 
What these seniors were will be best understood by a 
parallel place in Tertullian; for that place in Tertullian, 
and this in Firmilian, are usually cited to expound one 
another by most learned men, as by the most learned 
Dr. Cave,* and others. Now the passage in Tertullian is 
this: in the ecclesiastical courts “ approved elders pre- 
side.”» Now by these approved elders, bishops and pres- 
byters must necessarily be understood, because Tertullian 
speaks here of the discipline exerted in one particular 
church or parish, in which there was but one bishop; and 
if only he had presided, then there could not have been 
elders, in the plural number; but there being many elders 
to make out their number, we must add the presbyters to 
the bishop, who also presided with him, as we shall 
more fully show in another place. Now the same that 
presided in church consistories, the same also ordained ; 
presbyters, as well as bishops, presided in church consis- 
tories; therefore presbyters, as well as bishops, ordained. 
And as in those churches where there were presbyters, 
both they and the bishop presided together, so also they 
ordained together, both laying on their hands in ordina- 
tion, as St. Timothy was ordained “by the laying on of 
the hands of the presbytery ;”° that is, by the hands of the 
bishop and presbyters of that parish where he was or- 
dained, as is the constant signification of the word pres- 
bytery in all the writings of the ancients. But, 

10. Though as to every particular act of the bishop’s 
office, it could not be proved particularly that a presbyter 


majores natu, qui et baptizandi, et manum imponendi, et ordinandi pos- 
sident potestatem. Apud Cyprian. Epist. 75, § 6, p. 237. 

a Primitive Christianity, part 3, cap. 5, p. 379. 

> Probati president seniores. Apol.cap. 39, p. 709. 

© Mera éxidécewe TOV xElpGy Tod TpeoBuTepiov. 1 Tim. iv, 14. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 69 


did discharge them ; yet it would be sufficient, if we could 
prove that, in the general, a presbyter could, and did per- 
form them all. Now that a presbyter could do so, and 
consequently by the bishop’s permission did do so, will 
appear from the example of the great St. Cyprian, bishop 
of Carthage, who, being exiled from his church, writes a 
letter to the clergy thereof, wherein he exhorts and begs 
them “ to discharge their own and his office too, that so 
nothing might be wanting either to discipline or diligence.”s 
And much to the same effect he thus writes them in an- 
other letter: “ ‘Trusting therefore to your kindness and 
religion, which I have abundantly experienced, | exhort and 
command you by these letters, that in my stead you per- 
form those offices which the ecclesiastical dispensation re- 
quires.” Andina letter written upon the same occasion, 
by the clergy of the church of Rome to the clergy of the 
church of Carthage, we find these words toward the begin- 
ning thereof: “ And since it is incumbent upon us, who are 
as it were bishops, to keep the flock in the room of the pas- 
tor, if we shall be found negligent, it shall be said unto us, 
as it was said to our careless preceding bishops, in Eze- 
kiel, xxxiv, 3, 4, That we looked not after that which was 
lost, we did not correct him that wandered, nor bound up 
him that was lame, but we did eat their milk, and were 
covered with their wool.”* So that the presbyters were 


2 Fungamini illic et vestris partibus ac meis, ut nihil vel ad discipli- 
nam, vel ad diligentiam desit. Epist. 5, § 1, p. 15. 

> Fretus ergo et dilectione et religione vestra, quam satis novi, his 
literis et hortor, et mando, ut vos vice mea fungamini circa gerenda 
ea, que administratio religiosadeposcit. Epist. 6, § 2, p. 17. 

¢ Et cum incumbat nobis qui videmur prepositi esse, et vice pastoris 
custodire gregem, si negligentes inveniamur, dicetur nobis quod et an- 
tecessoribus nostris dictum est, qui tam negligentes prepositi erant : 
quoniam perditum non requisivimus, et errantem non correximus, et 
claudum non colligavimus, et lac eorum edebamus, et lanis eorum ope- 
riebamur, Apud Cyprian. Epist. 3, § 1, p.11. 





70 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


as it were bishops, that in the bishop’s absence kept his 
flock, and in his stead performed all those ecclesiastical 
offices which were incumbent on him. 

Now then, if the presbyters could supply the place of an 
absent bishop, and, in general, discharge all those offices 
to which a bishop had been obliged, if he had been pre- 
sent, it naturally follows that the presbyters could dis- 
charge every particular act and part thereof. If I should 
say, such a one has all the senses of a man, and yet also 
assert that he cannot see, I should be judged a self-contra- 
dictor in that assertion ; for, in affirming that he had all 
the human senses, I also affirmed that he saw, because 
seeing is one of those senses: for whatsoever is affirmed 
of a universal, is affirmed of every one of its particulars. 
So when the fathers say, that the presbyters performed 
the whole office of the bishop, it naturally ensues that 
they confirmed, ordained, baptized, &c., because those are 
particulars of that universal. 

But now, from the whole, we may collect a solid argu- 
ment for the equality of presbyters with bishops, as to 
order; for if a presbyter did all a bishop did, what dif- 
ference was there between them? A bishop preached, 
baptized, and confirmed—so did a presbyter. A bishop 
excommunicated, absolved, and ordained—so did a pres- 
byter. Whatever a bishop did, the same did a presbyter; 
the particular acts of their office were the same; the only 
difference that was between them was in degree ; but this 
proves there was none at all in order. 

2. That bishops and presbyters were of the same order, 
appears also from hence, that originally they had one and 
the same name, each of them being indifferently called 
bishops or presbyters. Hence we read in the Sacred 
Writ of several bishops in one particular church, as the 
bishops of Ephesus,* and Philippi,’ that is, the bishops 


*’Exioxdaovg. 20 Actor. v. 28, > ’Eatoxéaorc. 1. Phil. 1. 


THB PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 71 


and presbyters of those churches, as they were afterward 
distinctly called. And Clemens Romanus sometimes men- 
tions many bishops in the church of Corinth, whom at other 
times he calls by the name of presbyters, using those two 
terms as synonymous titles and appellations. ‘“ You have 
obeyed,” saith he, “ those that were set over you,” roi¢ 
nyovumévorg tucr,* and, “ Let us revere those that are set 
Over US,” mponyouuévove 7udv,> which are the usual titles of 
the bishops, and yet these in another place he calls pres- 
byters ;° describing their office by their sitting or presiding 
overus.?’ Wherefore he commands the Corinthians “ to be 
subject to their presbyters ;’* and whom in one line he 
calls érvoxoror, or bishops, the second line after he calls 
mpeoBitepot, Or presbyters. So Polycarp exhorts the Phi- 
lippians to be subject to their presbyters and deacons, 
under the name of presbyters, including both bishops and 
priests, as we now call them. 

The first that expressed these church officers by the 
distinct terms of bishops and presbyters, was Ignatius, 
who lived in the beginning of the second century, appro- 
priating the title of bishop, éxicxoroc, or overseer, to that 
minister who was the more immediate overseer and go- 
vernor of his parish ; and that of rpec@urepoc, elder or pres- 
byter, to him who had no particular care and inspection 
of a parish, but was only an assistant or curate to a 
bishop that had; the word érioxoroc, or bishop, denoting a 
relation to a flock or cure, tpeoBirepoc, or presbyter, signify- 
ing only a power or an ability to take the charge of such a 
flock or cure; the former implying an actual discharge 
of the office, the latter a power so to do. 

This distinction of titles, arismg from the difference of 
their circumstances, which we find first mentioned in Ig- 


a Epist. 1 ad Corinth. p. 2. > Tbidem. p. 30. 
© TIpecBirepor. Ibid.62. 4 Kadecauévwv rpeoButépwr. Ibid. p. 69. 
© 'Yxordynte toig mpecbvrépore. Ibid. p. 73. f Ibidem. p. 58. 


72 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


natius, was generally followed by the succeeding fathers, 
who, for the most part, distinguish between bishops and 
presbyters ; though sometimes, according to the primitive 
usage, they indifferently apply those terms to each of those 
persons. 

Thus, on the one hand, the titles of presbyters are given 
unto bishops; as Ireneus, in his synodical epistle, twice 
calls Anicetus, Pius, Higynus, Telesphorus, and Xistus, 
bishops of Rome, zpec@irepor, or presbyters.2 And those 
‘bishops who derived their succession immediately from 
the apostles,” he calls “the presbyters in the church ;”> 
and whom Clemens Alexandrinus in one line calls the 
bishop of a certain city not far from Ephesus, a few lines 
after he calls the presbyter.« 

And on the other hand, the titles of bishops are as- 
cribed to presbyters, as one of the discretive appellations 
of a bishop is pastor. Yet Cyprian also calls his presby- 
ters “the pastors of the flock.”4 Another was that of 
president, or one set over the people. Yet Cyprian also 
calls his presbyters presidents, or set over the people.° 
The bishops were also called rectors, or rulers. So Ori- 
gen calls the presbyters, “‘the governors of the people.”f 
And we find both bishops and presbyters included under 
the common name of presidents, or prelates, by St. Cyp- 
rian, in this his exhortation to Pomponius: “ And if all 
must observe the divine discipline, how much more must 
the presidents and deacons do it, who, by their conversa- 
tion and manners, must yield a good example to others ?”€ 


4 Apud. Euseb. lib. 5. cap. 14, p. 193. 

> Qui in ecclesia sunt presbyteri 
sione, &c. lib. 4, cap. 43, p. 277. 

© Ipecbvtepoc. Apud Euseb. lib. 5, cap. 24, p. 193. 

4 Pastores ovium. Epist. 11, § 1, p. 33. © Prepositi. Ibidem. 

f “Apxovtec Tod Aaod. Comment. in Matth. vol. 1, p. 246. 

& Et cum omnes omnino disciplinam tenere oporteat, multé magis 





qui cum episcopatus succes- 





THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 73 


Now if the same appellation of a thing be a good proof 
for the identity of its nature, then bishops and presbyters 
must be of the same order, because they had the same 
names and titles. Suppose it was disputed whether a 
parson and lecturer were of the same order, would not this 
sufficiently prove the affirmative: That though for some 
accidental respects they might be distinguished in their 
appellations, yet originally and frequently they were called 
by one andthe same name? ‘The same it is in this case: 
though, for some contingent and adventitious reasons, 
bishops and presbyters were discriminated in their titles, 
yet, originally, they were always, and afterward some- 
times, called by one and the same appellation ; and, there- 
fore, we may justly deem them to be one and the same 
order. 

But if this reason be not thought cogent enough, the 
third and last will, unquestionably, put all out of doubt, 
and most clearly evince the identity or sameness of bishops 
and presbyters, as to order; and that is, that it is expressly 
said by the ancients, that there were but two distinct 
ecclesiastical orders, viz., bishops and deacons, or pres- 
byters and deacons; and if there were but these two, 
presbyters cannot be distinct from bishops, for then there 
would be three. Now that there were but two orders, 
viz., bishops and deacons, is plain from that golden an- 
cient remain of Clemens Romanus, wherein he thus 
writes :—“ In the country and cities where the apostles 
preached, they ordained their first converts for bishops 
and deacons over those who should believe. Nor were 
these orders new; for, for many ages past it was thus 
prophesied concerning bishops and deacons, ‘1 will ap- 
point their bishops in righteousness, and their deacons in 


prepositos et diaconos curare hoc fas est, qui exemplum et documen- 
tum ceteris de conversatione et moribus suis prebeant. Epist. 62, 
§ 2, p. 169. 

4 


74 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


faith.’”* This place of Scripture which is here quoted is 
in Isa. lx, 7: ‘I will make thine officers peace, and thine 
exactors righteousness.” Whether it is rightly applied is 
not my business to determine. That that I observe from 
hence is, that there were but two orders instituted by the 
apostles, viz., bishops and deacons, which Clemens sup- 
poses were prophetically promised long before: and this 
is yet more evidently asserted in another passage of the 
said Clemens a little after, where he says, that the “ apos- 
tles foreknew, through our Lord Jesus Christ, that conten- 
tion would arise about the name of episcopacy; and, 
therefore, being endued with a perfect foreknowledge, 
appointed the aforesaid officers, viz., bishops and deacons, 
and left the manner of their succession described, that so, 
when they died, other approved men might succeed them 
and perform their office.”» So that there were only the 
two orders of bishops and deacons instituted by the apos- 
tles: and if they ordained but those two, I think no one 
had ever a commission to add a third, or to split one into 
two, as must be done if we separate the order of presby- 
ters from the order of bishops. But that when the apos- 
tles appointed the order of bishops, presbyters were in- 
cluded therein, will manifestly appear from the induction 
of those fore-cited passages in Clemens’s epistle, and his 
drift and design thereby, which was to appease and calm 


4 Kara yopac obv kai réAEte Knpvbooovtes Katicavoy Tag arapyac 
avTov ele émioKéToveg Kal dtakévovg THY pEAOVTWY TISEvELY: Kal 
robTo ov Kalvac, éx yap 697 TOAAGY Ypdver éyéyparTo TEpl éxtOKbTOY 
Kat dlaxovarv, oTw¢ yap Tob Aéyet 7 ypadn, KaTUSHowW Tove éTLOKO- 
move avtav év OtKaLootvvy, Kai Tove dLakévoug avT@y év ricer. Epist. 
1 ad Corinth. p. 54. 

b *Arécohor Hud tyvacay dia TOd Kupiov jue "Inoot Xpicod, bre 
Epic écae él Tov dvomatoc THE ETLOKOTIC, Sia tTavTnv obv TIHY aitiav 
Tpoyvwow eiAngorec TEAsiay KaTECHGaY TOE TpoELpHuEVOUE Kal weTasD 
éxivounv Sedaka, bruc sav Koyundoorr, dradéSwvtar éETEpoe dedokt- 
pacpuévor Gvdpec THY AEttovpyiav atv. Ibidem. p. 57. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 75 


the schisms and factions of some unruly members in the 
church of Corinth, who designed to depose their presby- 
ters. And that he might dissuade them from this violent 
and irregular action, among other arguments, he proposes 
to them that this was to thwart the design and will of God, 
who would that all should live orderly in their respective 
places, doing the duties of their own stations—not invad- 
ing the offices and functions of others; and that for this 
end, that all occasions of disorderliness and confusion 
might be prevented, he had instituted diversity of offices 
in his church; appointing every man to his peculiar 
work, to which he was to apply himself without violently 
leaping into other men’s places. And that, particularly, 
the apostles foreseeing, through the Holy Spirit, that con- 
tentious and unruly men would irregularly aspire to the 
episcopal office, by the deposition of their lawful presby- 
ters; therefore, that such turbulent spirits might be re- 
pressed, or left inexcusable, they ordained bishops and. 
deacons where they preached, and described the man- 
ner and qualifications of their successors who should 
come after them when they were dead and gone, and be 
revered and obeyed with the same respect and obedience 
as they before were ; and that, therefore, they were to be 
condemned as perverters of the divine institution, and 
contemners of the apostolic authority, who dared to de- 
grade their presbyters, who had received their episcopal 
authority in an immediate succession from those who were 
advanced to that dignity by the apostles themselves. 

This was the true reason for which the fore quoted 
passages were spoken, which clearly evinces that presby- 
ters were included under the title of bishops, or rather, 
that they were bishops ; for to what end should Clemens 
exhort the schismatical Corinthians to obey their presby- 
ters from the consideration of the apostles’ ordination of 
bishops, if their presbyters had not been bishops? 


$ 


76 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


But that the order of presbyters was the same with the 
order of bishops, will appear also from that place of Ireneus, 
where he exhorts us “to withdraw from those presbyters 
who serve their lusts, and having not the fear of God in 
their hearts, contemn others, and are lifted up with the dig- 
nity of their first session ; but to adhere to those who keep 
the doctrine of the apostles, and with their presbyterial order 
are inoffensive, and exemplary in sound doctrine, and a holy 
conversation, to the information and correction of others ; 
for such presbyters the church educates, and of whom the 
prophet saith, ‘I will give thee princes in peace, and 
bishops in righteousness.’ ”* Now that by these presby- 
ters, bishops are meant, I need not take much pains to 
prove; the precedent chapter positively asserts it; the 
description of them in this quotation, by their enjoying the 
dignity of the first session, and the application of that text 
of Isaiah unto them, clearly evince it. No one can deny 
but that there were bishops, that is, that they were supe- 
rior in degree to other presbyters; or, as Ireneus styles 
it, “ honoured with the first session ;” but yet he also says, 
that they were not different in order, being of the presby- 
terial order, which includes both bishops and presbyters. 

To this testimony of Ireneus I shall subjoin that of 
Clemens Alexandrinus, who, though he mentions “ the 
processes of bishops, presbyters, and deacons,”® from 


a Presbyteri qui serviunt suis voluptatibus et non preponunt timorem 
Dei in cordibus suis, sed centumeliis agunt reliquos, et principalis con- 
sessionis tumore elati sunt ab omnibus igitur talibus absistere 
oportet, adherere vero his, qui et apostolorum, sicut prediximus, doctri- 
nam custodiunt, et cum presbyterii ordine sermonem sanum, et conver- 
sationem sine offensa prestant, ad informationem et correctionem reli- 
quorum Tales presbyteros nutrit ecclesia, de quibus et propheta ait : 
Et dabo principes tuos in pace, et episcopos tuos in justitia. Lib. 4, 
cap. 44, p. 278. 

>-Erei kal ai évravda Kata thy ékkAnoiay mpoxoral émtoKdawr, 
mpeoBurépwr, diakbvor, ulunuara oluat ayyeduKne dbEge, KaKEivnc THE 








THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 77 


which some conclude the bishop’s superiority of order; 
yet the subsequent words evidently declare, that it must 
be meant only of degree, and that, as to order, they were 
one and the same; for he immediately adds, that “ those 
offices are an imitation of the angelic glory, and of that 
dispensation which, as the Scriptures say, they wait for, 
who, treading in the steps of the apostles, live in the 
perfection of evangelical righteousness; for these, the 
apostle writes, shall be took up into the clouds, (here he 
alludes to the manner of the saints’ glorification in 1 Thess. 
iv, 17, ‘Then we which are alive, and remain, shall be 
caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the 
Lord in the air, and so shall we ever be with the Lord,’) 
and there first, as deacons attend, and then, according to 
the process, or next station of glory, be admitted into the 
presbytery ; for glory differs from glory, till they increase 
to a perfect man.” Now in this passage there are two 
things which manifest that there were but two ecclesias- 
tical orders, viz., bishops and deacons, or presbyters and 
deacons ; the first is, that he says that those orders were 
resembled by the angelic orders. Now the Scripture 
mentions but two orders of angels, viz., archangels and 
angels, the archangels presiding over the angels, and the 
angels obeying and attending on the archangels. Accord- 
ing to this resemblance, therefore, there must be but two 
ecclesiastical orders in the church, which are, bishops or 
presbyters presiding and governing, with the deacons at- 
tending and obeying. ‘The other part of this passage, 
which proves but two ecclesiastical orders, is his likening 
oikovouiacg Tuyxdvovoly jv avapéverv oaoiv ai ypadat tode Kar’ Lyvoc 
TOV aToaToAwy év Tehetdoet SiKaLoobYAC Kai TO EvayyéALov BEBLwKdTac, 
év vedédatc TéTe¢ apbévtag ypddet 6 arbcoAo¢ Siakovyoely Kata TpO- 
Ta, émeita éyKatatayivat TO TpecBuTepiw Kata mpoxoTyy dbsn¢, d6Fa 
yap d6&ne dtadéper axpic dv eig TéXeLov Gvdpa advgjowow. Strom. lib. 
64, p. 401. 





78 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


of them to the progressive glory of the saints, who at the 
judgment day shall be caught up in the clouds, and there 
shall first as deacons attend and wait on Christ’s judg- 
ment seat; and then, when the judgment is over, shall 
have their glory perfected in being placed on the celestial 
thrones of that sublime presbytery, where they shall for 
ever be blest and happy. 

So that there were only the two orders of deacons and 
presbyters, the former whereof, being the inferior order, 
never sat at their ecclesiastical conventions, but, like ser- 
vants, stood and waited on the latter,s who sat down on 
Spdvor,» or seats in the form of a semicircle, whence they 
are frequently called concessus presbyterii, or the session 
of the presbytery, in which session he that was more pe- 
culiarly the bishop or minister of the parish sat at the 
head of the semicircle, ona seat somewhat elevated above 
those of his colleagues,° as Cyprian calls them, and so was 
distinguished from them by his priority in the same order, 
but not by his being of another order. Thus the fore- 
said Clemens Alexandrinus distinguishes the bishop from 
the presbyters by his being advanced to the tpwroxad édpra, 
or the first seat in the presbytery, not by his sitting in a 
different seat from them: for thus he writes, ‘‘ He is in 
truth a presbyter of the church, and a minister of the will 
of God, who does and teaches the things of the Lord, not 
ordained by men, or esteemed just, because a presbyter ; 
but, because just, therefore received into the presbytery : 
who, although he be not honoured with the first seat on 
earth, yet shall hereafter sit down on the twenty and four 
thrones mentioned in the Revelation, judging the peo- 


® Videt et ordinationes, sive stationes ministrorum ejus, diaconorum, 
ut mihi videtur, ordinem memorat astantium divino ministerio. Homil. 
2 in Cantic. Cantic. Origen. 

> Nobiscum sedeat in Clero. Cyprian. Epist. 35, p. 84. 

© Collegis meis. Epist. 28, § 2, p. 64. 


oe 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 79 


ple.”* So that both bishops and presbyters were members 
of the same presbytery, only the bishop was advanced to 
the first and chiefest seat therein, which is the very same 
with what I come now from proving, viz., that bishops and 
presbyters were equal in order, but different in degree ; 
that the former were the ministers of their respective par- 
ishes, and the latter their curates or assistants. 

Whether this hath been fully proved, or whether the 
precedent quotations do naturally conclude the premises, 
the learned reader will easily determine. I am not con- 
scious that I have stretched any words beyond their natural 
signification, having deduced from them nothing but what 
they fairly imported: if I am mistaken, I hope I shall be 
pardoned, since I did it not designedly or voluntarily. As 
before, so now I profess again, that if any one shall be so 
kind and obliging to give me better information, I shall 
thankfully and willingly acknowledge and quit my error ; 
but till that information be given, and the falsity of my pre- 
sent opinion be evinced, (which, after the impartialest and 
narrowest inquiry I see not how it can be done,) I hope no 
one will be offended that I have asserted the equality or 
identity of the bishops and presbyters as to order, and their 
difference only as to pre-eminency or degree. 

§ 4. Now from this notion of presbyters, there evidently 
results the reason why there were many of them in one 
church, even for the same intent and end, though more 
necessary and needful, that curates are now to those min- 
isters and incumbents whom they serve. It was found 


2 Obtoe tpeoBitepoc est TH bvTL THe ExkAnoiac, Kat Staxdvog aAndn¢ 
The ToD cod BovAjoewc, tav Torp Kal OiddoKy Ta TOd KUpLOd, Ody’ UT” 
dvSporwv xetpotovotpevoc, odd? bre mpecBitepoc, dixarocg voulCopuevoc, 
GAN bre dixatoc év rpecBuTepiy KaTadeyouévoc, Kav évtaida ere yng 
mpwrokatedpia uy Ty Shy, év role elxoor Kal Técoapore Kadedeitat Op6- 
vole Tov Aabv Kpivwr, O¢ dnoly év TH ’AroKadbper lwavrvyg. Stromat. 
lib. 6, p. 400. 


80 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


by experience, that variety of accidents and circumstances 
did frequently occur, both in times of peace and persecu- 
tion, the particulars whereof would be needless to enu- 
merate, that disabled the bishops from attending on, and 
discharging their pastoral office ; therefore that such va- 
cancies might be supplied, and such inconveniences 
remedied, they entertained presbyters or curates, who, 
during their absence, might supply their places, who also 
were helpful to them, whilst they were present with their 
flocks, to counsel and advise them: whence Bishop Cyp- 
rian assures us that he did all things by the ‘“ common 
counsel” of his presbyters.* 

Besides this, in those early days of Christianity churches 
were in most places thin, and at a great distance from one 
another ; so that if a bishop by any disaster was incapaci- 
tated for the discharge of his function, it would be very 
dificult to get a neighbouring bishop to assist him. To 
which we may also add, that in those times there were no 
public schools or universities, except we say the cate- 
chetic lecture at Alexandria was one, for the breeding 
of young ministers, who might succeed the bishops as they 
died; wherefore the bishops of every church took care to 
instruct and elevate some young men, who might be pre- 
pared to come in their place when they were dead and 
gone. And thus for these and the like reasons most 
churches were furnished with a competent number of 
presbyters, who helped the bishops while living, and were 
fit to succeed them when dead. 

§ 5. I say only, most churches were furnished with 
presbyters, because all were not, especially those churches 
which were newly planted, where either the numbers or 
abilities of the believers were small and inconsiderable : 
neither indeed were presbyters essential to the constitu- 


@ Communi consilio. Epist. 24, p. 55. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 8} 


tion of a church: a church might be without them, as 
well as a parish can be without a curate now; it was 
sufficient that they had a bishop; a presbyter was only 
necessary for the easing of the bishop in his office, and to 
be qualified for the succeeding him in his place and dig- 
nity after his death. For, as Tertullian writes, “ where 
there are no presbyters, the bishop alone administers the 
two sacraments of the Lord’s supper and baptism.”* 

§ 6. As for the time when presbyters began, to me it 
seems plain that their office was even in tho apostolic age, 
though by their names they were not distinguished from 
bishops till some time after. The first author now extant, 
who distinctly mentions bishops and presbyters, is Igna- 
tius, bishop of Antioch, who lived in the beginning of the 
second century: but without doubt before his time, even 
in the days of the apostles, where churches increased or 
were somewhat large, there were more in holy orders 
than the bishops of those churches. We read in the 
New Testament of the bishop of Ephesus, Acts xx, 28; 
and of Philippi, Phil. i, 1; which must be understood of 
what was afterward distinctly called bishops and presby- 
ters. So, likewise, we read in Timothy, 1 Tim. iv, 14, 
of a presbytery, which, in all the writings of the fathers, 
for any thing I can find to the contrary, perpetually signi- 
fies the bishop and presbyters of a particular church or 
parish. And to this we may add what Clemens Alexan- 
drinus reports of St. John, that he went into the neigh- 
bouring provinces of Ephesus “ partly that he might con- 
stitute bishops, partly that he might plant new churches, 
and partly that he might appoint such in the number of the 
clergy as should be commanded him by the Holy Ghost.”? 
Where, by the word clergy being opposed to bishops, and 


@ Ubi ecclesiastici ordinis non est consessus, et offert, et tingit sacer- 
dos, qui est ibisolus. Exhort. ad Castitat. p. 457. 
> *Orov ubv émiokéroug KaTashowy, brov dé bAag EKkKAnoiag dpud- 
4* 


82 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


so consequently different from them, must be understood 
either deacons alone, or, which is far more probable, pres- 
byters and deacons. 


CHAPTER V. 


§ 1. The order and office of the deacons. § 2. Subdeacons, what. 
§ 3. Of acolyths, exorcists, and lectors; through those offices the 
bishops gradually ascended to their episcopal dignity. § 4. Of ordi- 
nation. First, of deacons. 4 5. Next, of presbyters: the candidates 
for that office presented themselves to the presbytery of the parish 
where they were ordained. § 6. By them examined about four 
qualifications, viz., their age. § 7. Their condition in the world. 
§ 8. Their conversation. §9. And their understanding. Human 
learning needful. § 10. Some inveighed against human learning, 
but condemned by Clemens Alexandrinus. § 11. Those that were 
to be ordained presbyters generally passed through the inferior 
offices. § 12. When to be ordained, propounded to the people for 
their attestation. 4 13. Ordained in, but not to a particular church. 
§ 14. Ordained by the imposition of the hands of the presbytery. 
§ 15. The conclusion of the first particular, concerning the peculiar 
acts of the clergy. 


§ 1. Next to the presbyters were the deacons, con- 
cerning whose office and order I shall say very little, 
since there is no great controversy about it: and had it not 
been to have rendered this discourse complete and entire, 
I should in silence have passed it over. Briefly, there- 
fore, their original institution, as in Acts vi, 2, was to serve 
tables, which included these two things,—a looking after 
the poor, and an attendance at the Lord’s table. As for 
the care of the poor, Origen tells us that “the deacons 


owv, Orov dé KAnpw Evaye TLva KAnpoowY THY bro TOD TrEtbuaTOC O7N- 
Hatvouévov. Apud Euseb. lib. 3, cap. 23, p. 92. 





THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 83 


dispensed to them the church’s money,”* being employed 
under the bishop to inspect and relieve all the indigent 
within their diocess: as for their attendance at the Lord’s 
table, their office with respect to that consisted in prepar- 
ing the bread and wine, in cleansing the sacramental cups, 
and other such like necessary things; whence they are 
called by Ignatius ‘“‘ deacons of meats and cups,’® assist- 
ing also, in some places at least, the bishops or presbyters 
in the celebration of the eucharist, “delivering the ele- 
ments to the communicants.”« They also preached, of 
which more in another place ; and, in the “ absence of the 
bishop and presbyters, baptized.”4 In a word, according 
to the signification of their name, they were, as Ignatius 
calls them, “the church’s servants,”® set apart on purpose 
to serve God, and attend on their business, being con- 
stituted, as Eusebius terms it, “for the service of the 
public.”! 

§ 2. Next to the deacons were the subdeacons, who are 
mentioned both by Cyprian and Cornelius." As the 
office of the presbyters was to assist and help the bishops, 
so theirs was to assist and help the deacons. And as the 
presbyters were of the same order with the bishop, so 
probably the subdeacons were of the same order with the 
deacons, which may be gathered from what we may sup- 
pose to have been the origin and rise of these subdeacons, 


a Avdkovoe StorkobvrTec Ta THE ExKAnoiag ypyuata. Comment. in 
Mat. tom. 16, p. 443, vol. 1. : 

> Bowudtwv Kai roTdv eiow didKovot. Epist. ad Tralles. p. 48. 

© Arvdkovor diddacww éxdcw Tov Tapovtav petadabeiv dro Tob evya- 
pichSevtoc aptov kai oivov. Just. Martyr. Apolog. 2, p. 97. 

4 Baptismum dandi habet jus episcopus dehine presbyteri et diaconi. 
Tertul. de Bapt. p. 602. 

¢ "ExxAgoiac Ocot tanpéta. Epist.ad Tralles. p. 48. 

{'Yrepnotac Tov Kowvod. Lib. 2, cap. 1, p. 38. 

& Hypodiaconum optatum. LEpist. 24, p. 55. 

h 'Yrodiaxévoug Extra. Apud Euseb. lib. 6, cap. 43, p. 244. 


84 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


which might be this: that in no church whatsoever was it 
usual to have more than seven deacons, because that was 
the original number instituted by the apostles: wherefore, 
when any church grew so great and numerous that this 
stinted number of deacons was not sufficient to discharge 
their necessary ministrations, that they might not seem to 
swerve from the apostolical example, they added assist- 
ants to the deacons, whom they called subdeacons or 
under-deacons, who were employed by the head or chief 
deacons, to do those services, in their stead and room, to 
which, by their office, they were obliged. But whether 
this be a sufficient argument to prove subdeacons to be of 
the same order with the deacons, I shall not determine, 
because, this office being now antiquated, it is not very 
pertinent tomy design: I only offer it to the consideration 
of the learned who have will and ability to search into it. 

§ 3. Besides those forementioned orders, who were im- 
mediately consecrated to the service of God, and by him 
commissioned thereunto, there were another sort of ec- 
clesiastics, who were employed about the meaner offices 
of the church, such as acolyths,* exorcists,’ and lectors,° 
whose offices, because they are now disused, except that 
of the lector, I shall pass over in silence, reserving a dis- 
course of the lector for another place ; only, in general, 
these were candidates for the ministry, who, by the due 
discharge of these meaner employs, were to give proof 
of their ability and integrity, the bishops in those days not 
usually arriving, per saltum, to that dignity and honour ; 
but commonly beginning with the most inferior office, and 
so gradually proceeding through the others till they came 
to the supreme office of all, as Cornelius, bishop of Rome, 


4 Naricum acoluthum. Cyprian. Epist. 36, p. 87. 

> Unus de exorcistis vir probatus. Firmil. apud Cyprian. Epist. 75, 
§ 10, p. 238. 

° Hos lectores constitutos. Cyprian. Epist. 34, § 4, p. 81. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 85 


“did not presently leap into the episcopal throne, but first 
passed through all the ecclesiastical offices, gradually 
ascending to that sublime dignity ;”* the church, in those 
happy days, by such a long trial and experience, using all 
possible precaution and exactness, that none but fit and 
qualified men should be admitted into those sacred func- 
tions and orders, which were attended with so dreadful 
and tremendous a charge. And this now brings me, in 
the next place, to inquire into the manner and form of the 
primitive ordinations, which I choose to discourse of in 
this place, since I shall find none more proper for it 
throughout this whole treatise. 

§ 4. As for the various senses and acceptations which 
may be put on the word ordination, [ shall not at all med- 
dle with them ; that ordination that I shall speak of is this, 
the grant of a peculiar commission and power, which re- 
mains indelible in the person to whom it is committed, 
and can never be obliterated or rased out, except the per- 
son himself cause it by his heresy, apostacy, or most ex- 
tremely gross and scandalous impiety. Now this sort of 
ordination was conferred only upon deacons and presby- 
ters, or on deacons and bishops, presbyters and bishops 
being here to be considered as all one, as ministers of the 
church universal. As for the ordination of deacons, there 
is no great dispute about that, so ] shall say no more con- 
cerning it, than that we have the manner thereof at their 
first institution in Acts vi, 6, which was, that they were 
ordained to their office by prayer and imposition of hands. 

§ 5. But as for the ordination of presbyters, I shall more 
distinctly and largely treat of the manner and form thereof, 
which seems to be as follows : 

Whosoever desired to be admitted into this sacred office, 

2Non iste ad episcopatum subitd pervenit, per omnia ecclesiastica 


officia promotus ad sacerdotii sublime fastigium cunctis religionis 
gradibus ascendit. Cyprian. Epist. 52, 94, p. 119. 





86 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


he first proposed himself to the presbytery of the parish 
where he dwelt and was to be ordained, desiring their 
consent to his designed intention, praying them to confer 
upon him those holy orders which he craved. Now we 
may suppose his petition was to the whole presbytery, 
because a bishop alone could not give those holy orders, 
as is most evident from Cyprian, who assures us that “all 
clerical ordinations were performed by the common coun- 
sel of the whole presbytery.”* And therefore, when, 
upon a “most urgent and necessary occasion,”® he had 
been forced to ordain one but a lector, without the advice 
and consent of his presbytery, which, one will be apt to 
think, was no great usurpation, he takes great pains (Epist. 
24, p. 55) to justify and excuse himself for so doing. 

§ 6. Upon this application of the candidate for the 
ministry, the presbytery took it into their consideration, 
debated his petition “in their common council,”* and pro- 
ceeded to examine whether he had those endowments 
and qualifications which were requisite for that sacred 
ofice. What those gifts and qualifications were touching 
which he was examined, may be reduced to these four 
heads,—his age, his condition in the world, his conversa- 
tion, and his understanding. 

As for his age: it was necessary for him to have lived 
some time in the world, to have been of a ripe and mature 
age; for they ordained no novices, or young striplings: 
that was the practice of the heretics, whom Tertullian 
jeers and upbraids with ordaining “raw and inexperienced 
clerks.”4 But as for the orthodox, they took care to confer 
orders on none but on suchas were well stricken in years; 
observing herein the apostolic canon in 1 Tim. iii. 6: 


@ Communi consilio omnium nostrum. Epist. 24, p. 55. 

> Necesse fuit necessitate urgente promotum est. Ibidem. 

© Communi consilio. Epist. 24, apud Cyprian. p. 55. 

4 Nunc neophytos conlocant. De prescript. advers. Heret. p. 89. 





THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 87 


“Not a novice, lest, being lifted up with pride, he fall 
into the condemnation of the devil.” But yet, if any 
young man was endued with extraordinary grace and 
ability, the fewness of his years was no obstacle to his 
promotion, that being superseded by the greatness of his 
merit ; as we find in the case of Aurelius in Cyprian, who, 
though young in years,* yet for his eminent courage and 
excellency,” was graced with ecclesiastical orders ; and 
such a one, I suppose, was the bishop of Magnesia in the 
times of Ignatius, which gave occasion to that exhortation 
to the people of that diocess, “ not to despise their bishop’s 
age, but to yield him all due respect and reverence.”¢ 

§ 7. As for his condition in the world, he was not to 
be entangled with any mundane affairs, but to be free from 
all secular employments, and at perfect liberty to apply 
himself wholly to the duties of his office and function. 
This also was founded on that other apostolic canon in 
2 Tim. ii, 4: “ No man that warreth entangleth himself 
with the affairs of this life, that he may please him who 
hath chosen him to be a soldier :” “ Which words,” saith 
Cyprian, “if spoken of all, how much more ought not they 
to be entangled with secular troubles and snares, who, 
being busied in divine and spiritual things, cannot leave 
the church to mind earthly and worldly actions! which 
religious ordination,” as he goes on to write, ‘“‘ was em- 
blematized by the Levites under the law; for when the 
land was divided, and possessions were given to eleven 
tribes, the Levites, who waited upon the temple and altar, 
and the sacred offices thereof, had no share in that divi- 
sion; but the others tilled the ground, whilst they only 


a Jn annis adhuc novellus. Cyprian. Epist. 33, p. 76. 

> Merebatur——clerice ordinationis gradus et incrementa 
non de annis suis, sed de meritis estimandus. Ibidem. 

© My cvyxpdotar TH HAtkia Tod émitoKérov GAAG 
avTo drovéuetv. Ignat. Epist. ad Magnes. p. 31. 











Tdaoapv évrporny 


88 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


worshipped God, and received tenths of the others’ in- 
crease for their food and sustenance; all which happened 
by the divine authority and dispensation, that they who 
waited on divine employments should not be withdrawn 
therefrom, or be forced either to think of, or to do, any 
secular affairs: which fashion,” as he there continues to 
write, “is now observed by the clergy, that those who are 
promoted to clerical ordinations should not be impeded in 
their divine administrations, or encumbered with secular 
concerns and affairs, but as tenths, receiving subscriptions 
from the brethren, depart not from the altar and sacrifices, 
but night and day attend on spiritual and heavenly medi- 
tations.”* ‘These words were spoken on the occasion of 
a certain bishop called Germinius Victor, who at his death 
made a certain presbyter, called Germinius Faustinus, 
trustee of his last will and testament, which trust Cyp- 
rian condemns as void and null, “because a synod had 
before decreed that no clergyman should be a trustee, for 


a Nemo militans Deo obligat se molestiis secularibus, ut possit pla- 
cere ei cuise probavit. Quod cum de omnibus dictum sit, quanto ma- 
gis molestiis et laqueis secularibus obligari non debent, qui divinis rebus 
et spiritualibus occupati, ab ecclesia recedere, et ad terrenos et secula- 
res actus vacare non possunt, cujus ordinationis et religionis formam 
Levitz prits in lege tenuerunt, ut cum terram dividerent, et possessiones 
partirentur undecim tribus, Levitica tribus, que templo et altari, et min- 
isteriis divinis vacabat, nihil de illa divisionis portione perciperet, sed 
aliis terram colentibus, illa tantum Deum coleret, et ad victum atque 
alimentum suum ab undecim tribubus, de fructibus qui nascebantur, 
decimas reciperet. Quod totum fiebat de auctoritate et dispositione 
divina, ut qui operationibus divinis insistebant, in nulla re avocarentur, 
nec cogitare aut agere secularia cogerentur. Que nunc ratio et forma 
in clero tenetur, ut qui in ecclesia Domini ordinatione clerica promo- 
ventur, in nullo ab administratione divina avocentur, nec molestiis et 
negotiis secularibus alligentur, sed in honore sportulantium fratrum 
tanquam decimas ex fructibus accipentes, ab altari et sacrificiis non re- 
cedant, sed die ac nocte ccelestibus rebus et spiritualibus serviant. 
Epist. 66, § 1, 2, p. 195. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 89 


this reason, because those who were in holy orders ought 
only to attend upon the altar and its sacrifices, and to give 
themselves wholly to prayer and supplication.”* It was 
a blot in the heretics’ ordinations, that they “ ordained 
such as were involved in the world, and embarrassed with 
carnal and secular concerns.” 

§ 8. As for the conversation of the party to be ordained, 
“he was to be humble and meek ;”’* of an unspotted and 
exemplary life. So says Cyprian: ‘In all ordinations we 
ought to choose men of an unspotted integrity, who, wor- 
thily and holily offering up sacrifices to God, may be heard 
in those prayers which they make for the safety of their 
flock: for it is written, ‘ God heareth not a sinner; but if 
any one be a worshipper of him, and doeth his will, him he 
heareth.’”* Wherefore, before they were ordained, they 
were proposed to the people for their testimony and attesta- 
tion of their holy life and conversation. But of this we shall 
speak more in another place; only it may not be improper 
to remember here, that this is also an apostolic canon, in 
1 Tim. iii, 2,3,7: “ A bishop then must be blameless, the 
husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, 
given to hospitality, apt to teach; not given to wine, no 
striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a 


a Cum jampridem in consilio episcoporum statutum sit, ne quis de 
clericis et dei ministris tutorem vel curatorem testamento suo constituat, 
quando singuli divino sacerdotio honorati, et in clerico ministerio consti- 
tuti, non nisi altari et sacrificiis deservire, et precibus atque orationibus 
vacare debeant. Epist. 66,§1, 2, p. 195. 

> Nunc seculo obstrictos conlocant. Tertul. de Prescript. advers. 
Heret. p. 89. 

¢ Humiles et mites. Cyprian. Epist. 38, § 1, p. 90. 

4 In ordinationibus sacerdotum non nisi immaculatos et integros anti- 
stites eligere debemus, qui sancté et digné sacrificia Deo offerentes, 
audiri in precibus possint, quas faciunt pro plebis dominice incolumi- 
tate, cum scriptum sit, Deus peccatorem non audit, sed siquis Deum 
coluerit, et voluntatem ejus fecerit, illum audit. Epist. 68, § 2, p. 201. 


90 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


brawler, not covetous. Moreover, he must have a good 
report of them which are without; lest he fall into reproach 
and the snare of the devil.” 

§ 9. As for the understanding of the person to be or- 
dained, he was to be of a good capacity, fit and able duly 
to teach others. This is also another of the apostolic 
canons in 2 Tim. 1,15: ‘“ Study to show thyself approved 
unto God—a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, 
rightly dividing the word of truth.” And in 1 Tim. ii, 2: 
“ A bishop must be apt to teach ;” which implies an ability 
of teaching, and a capacity of rightly understanding, ap- 
prehending, and applying the word of God; to which end 
human learning was so conducive, as that Origen pleads 
not only for its usefulness, but also for its necessity ; 
especially for that part of it which we call logic, to find 
out the true sense and meaning of the Scripture, as appears 
from this following digression which he makes concerning 
it inone of his commentaries: ‘‘ How is it possible,” saith 
he, “that a question either in ethics, physics, or divinity, 
should be understood as it ought, without logic? You 
shall hear no absurdity from those who are skilled in logic, 
and diligently search out the signification of words; 
whereas many times, through our ignorance in logic, we 
greatly err, not distinguishing homonymies, amphibolies ; 
the different usages, properties, and distinctions of words; 
as some, from the ignorance of the homonymy of the word 
world, have fell into wicked opinions touching its Maker ; 
not discerning what that signifies in 1 John v, 19, ‘ The 
world lies in wickedness ;’? where they, understanding 
by the world, the frame of heaven and earth, and all 
creatures therein, blaspheme the Creator thereof by affirm- 
ing, that the sun, moon, and stars, which move in so exact 
an order, lie in wickedness. So also, through the same 
ignorance, they know not the true sense of that text in 


John i, 29, ‘This is the Lamb of God which taketh away 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 91 


the sin of the world.’ Neither of that in 2 Cor. v, 19, 
‘God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself’ 
Wherefore, if we would not err about the true sense of 
the Holy Scripture, it is necessary that we understand 
logic ;”* which art of logic,» the aforesaid father thinks, is 
recommended to us by Solomon in Prov. x, 17: “ He that 
refuseth reproof [or logic, as he rendereth it] erreth.” 
Clemens Alexandrinus also stifly asserts the utility of 
human learning, where he says, “that it is profitable to 
Christianity, for the clear and distinct demonstrations of 
its doctrine, in that it helps us to the more evident under- 
standing of the truth.”4 And, in particular for logic, he 


® Ei divatar 78ixov TpoGAnua, 7) dvotAoyotuevoy f Seodoyobmevor 
xGpie axpiBeitat onuaivouévwr Kal TOV KaTa TOV AoyLKoV TéTOV Tpa- 
vovuuévwr Ov del TpoTov Tapicactat Ti yap dToToV aKovety TOV Kupt- 
oAEKTpELEVvar, év Talc draréxTore Kal Egicdvewy exipwedOe Tog onaLvo- 
Hévowc; éoe yap Orov Tapa THY ayvotay THY AoytKOY peydAwc TepiTin- 
Touev un Kadaipovtes Ta¢ Guwrupiac Kal dudlBoAiac, Kal KaTAaYpHoete, 
kai xuptoAegiac, Kai dtacoAdc btov mapa TO dyvosioSat Tov 6udvupuov 
THe KOoLOV Tpoonyopiac Gwvyv exTETTwKdoLy ext TO doeBécaTa dpovetv 
Tept Tov Snuovpyov of un KaSdpavtec ent Tivwy Keita 70, 6 Kéopo¢ ev 
TO Tovnpd Keita, bt avti Tov Teptyeiov Kai dvOpwriver TodTo obTu¢ 
éxel TH lwdvry eipytat, oindévteg yap Kéouov Kar’ avTyy Thy Aé&Ew 
onuaivesSat To obcnua TO é& oipavod Kai yij¢ Ka TOV év adbtoi¢c pact. 
TATA Kai avoolwTaTa arogaivovTar TEpi Oecd pndadc *pyw Sekvivat 
Ouvduevor THC HALog Kai CeAyvy Kat acépec Ta ObTW TETAypEVA KLVOd- 
peva Keital év TH TOovypG eita Eav TpNGdywmev adbToic éK TO OvTOG 
écuv 6 duvoc Tod OEod 6 alpwr THv duaptiay Tod} Koofot——rdAwW TE 
Bedc Hv év Xpic@ Koopov KatahAdocowy éavt@:6Tt Kai Ka Hud Tod¢ 
Sédovtac py oddAhecdat wept THY aGAnderav év TH voeiv Tag Veiac 
ypabac GvayKalotata éct Ta TintovTa Ele THY Yphow EidEevar AoyLKG. 
Tom. 1, Comm. in Genes. pp. 16, 17, vol. 1. 

> Tlpotpérec kai 6 Seiog Adyoc jude ért dtadeKriKyy,dr0v piv Lodo- 
pOvto¢g Aéyovtog, Tlaideia dé avegédeyxtoc. Contra Celsum. lib. 
6, p. 279. 

© Pidocodia ypnoiun mpd¢ GeooéBerav yiverar mporaideia Ti¢ ovoa 
toic THY Ticty Ov amodeigews Kaprovpévoic. Strom. lib. 1, p. 207. 

4 dijocodia mpo¢ KaTdAnwiy tig adnVeiac. Ibidem. p. 233. 


92 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


gives it high encomiums, as that “it is a hedge to defend 
the truth from being trod down by sophisters ;”* that “ it 
gives us great light duly to understand the Holy Scrip- 
tures ;”» that ‘“ it is necessary to confute the sophisms of 
heretics.”* And, in general, for all sorts of learning he 
tells us, that “it keeps the way of life, that we be not de- 
ceived or circumvented by those that endeavour to draw 
us into the way of sin.”* So that he thinks philosophy 
and the liberal arts “ came down from heaven unto men.”® 
But should I produce all the passages, in this father, con- 
cerning the utility and excellency of human learning, I 
must transcribe several pages in folio ; which, if the reader 
has a curiosity to view, he may especially take notice of 
these places, Stromat. lib. 1, pp. 209-215; and Stromat. 
lib. 6, pp. 471-477. 

§ 10. It is true, there were some in those days of whom 
Clemens Alexandrinus complains, ‘“ who dreaded philoso- 
phy, lest it should deceive them, as much as children did 
hobgoblins ;”f because they saw, by too lamentable ex- 
perience, that many learned men’s brains were so charmed 
or intoxicated with philosophical notions, as that they 
laboured to transform them into Christian verities, and so 
thereby became authors of most pestilent and damnable 
heresies, which is particularly observed by Tertullian 


4 OpiyKo¢ yap éct OradeKtiKy Oc un KaTaraTeioSat Tpb¢ THY codto- 
Tov THY aGAnSerav. Stromat. lib. 6, p. 472. 

> Taic ypagaic aitaic péya dG¢ évtixtet Taig Woyaic. Ibidem. 

©'H duakextixn ovvepyel mpog TO wy bmomITTELY Taig KaTAaTpEYO- 
calc aipéoeotv. Stromat. lib. 1, p. 234. 

4 'Odod¢ dé Cone dvAdocer radeia O¢ pH araTnTival, O¢ wn KAaTI- 
vat mpog THv émi BAGBN TOV dkpowuévwv KakoTEyviay HOKNHKOTUY. 
Ibid. p. 210. 

© Oéobev HKelv Eig dv8pwaove. Stromat. lib. 1, p. 210. 

fTléAAo. d& Kadarep ot maideg Ta poppoAvKia, obtTw¢ dediact THY 
“EAAgvixny diAocodiay doBobuevor py anaydyy avtovg. Stromat. lib. 
6, p. 472. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 93 


with respect to the heretics of his time, who, on this ac- 
count, calls “ the philosophers the patriarchs of heretics.”* 
Therefore they accused philosophy itself, as “ the produc- 
tion of some evil inventor, introduced into the world for 
the ruin and destruction of mankind.”® Even Tertullian 
himself, for this reason, had an extreme pique against 
philosophy, and violently decried it, especially logic, as 
inconsistent with true Christianity; as may be seen at 
large in his book, “ De Prescriptione adversus Hereti- 
cos,” pp. 70, 71. 

But to this objection Clemens Alexandrinus replies, that 
if any man had been deceived and misled by philosophy, 
“that that proceeded not from philosophy, but from the 
wickedness of his nature; for whosoever has wisdom 
enough to use it, he is able thereby to make a larger and 
amore demonstrative defence of the faith than others.”¢ 
And concerning logic in particular, he tells them, that as 
for eristic, jangling logic, for impertinent and contentious 
sophisms, which he elegantly calls rag oxiag rév Adyor— 
“ the shadows of reason,”¢ he disliked it as much as they, 
and frequently inveighs against it. But as for the solid, 
substantial part of it, he could not but deem it profitable 
and advantageous, since “it helps us to find out the 
truth,”’ “enables us the better to understand the Scrip- 


@ Hereticorum patriarche philosophi. Advers. Hermog. p. 266. 

> Of dé Kat Tpi¢ KaKod av THY diAocOdiav eiodedoKévat TOY Biov Vo- 
pilovow éri Avuyn Tov dvdparwv Tpo¢ Tivog evpeTod Tovypod. Clem. 
Alexan. Strom. lib. 4, p. 204. 

© Mare tiv diAocodiay Avpaivectat tov Biov, pevdiv mpayudtov Kat 
gavdwy éEpywv Onuiovpyov bndpyovoay mEepiBoAm TAsiovt Ypupévovg 
aunynnn cvyyvpvaciay Tiva Ticews aTOSELKTLKHY ExTropicéoSar. Strom. 
lib. 1, p. 204. 

4 Stromat. lib. 6, p. 500. 

© Stromat. lib. 1, pp. 205, 21], 212, 215: and lib. 6, pp. 472, 500. 

f LuAAauBaverar grAocodia TH mpog THY GAnSeLav evpécer. Strom. 
lib. 1, p. 233. 


94 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


tures,”* and “shows us how to refel the sophisms and 
cunning arguments of the heretics.” 

But, besides this sort of objectors, there were others, 
of whom Clemens Alexandrinus speaks, who condemned 
learning on this account, because it was “ human,”¢ unto 
whom that father answers, that ‘it was most unreason- 
able that philosophy only should be contemned on this 
account, and that the meanest arts besides, even those 
of a smith and shipwright, which are as much human, 
should be commended and approved ;”¢ that ‘ they did not 
rest here, and go no farther; but, having got what was 
useful and profitable from it, they ascended higher unto 
the true philosophy,’* “ making this human philosophy a 
guide unto, or a preparatory for, the true philosophy.” 

These were the sentiments of this learned father touch- 
ing the utility and excellency of human learning, with 
respect to the interpretation of Scripture, the finding out 
and the defending of the true faith and doctrine, and such 
like things, which were the very heart and soul of the 
presbyters’ function and employ; from whence we may 
rationally collect that it was needful, amiable, and profit- 
able ina presbyter. I do not say that it was absolutely 
necessary, for it is apparent that a great part of the an- 
cient presbyters were not skilled in it; but I say that it 


a Tai¢ ypadaic avtaic péya bG¢ évtixter Taig Wvyaic. Stromat. lib. 
6, p. 472. 

b'H dvadextixy ovvepyei mpocg TO pn bromine Tai¢ KaTapexovoatc 
aipéoco.v. Stromat. lib. 1, p. 234. 

© ’Avdpurivyy civeov. Stromat. lib. 6, p. 476. 

4 lé¢ obk GAoyov TekToviKig Kal vauTnyltKne yeipov volley dtAoco- 
diav. Ibidem. p. 476. 

© Oidapde tovto.e év dratpimteov GAN’ 7 Eig pdvov Td az’ abTtov 
Xphoov G¢ AaBdvtTa¢g ToiTo Kai KTHnoOamévoveg areivat olxade dbvac- 
Gar eri tHv adndH otAoccodiav. Ibidem. p. 475. 

f TIporapacketater toivuy 7 dtAocodia mpoodoroLovca Tov Ura Xpic- 
Tod TeAecovpevov. Stromat. lib. 1, p. 207. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 95 


was very useful and advantageous, and they prized and 
esteemed those presbyters who were versed in it, espe- 
cially those of them who were arch-presbyters, or bishops, 
who, if possible, were to be well read in those parts of 
learning, which were proper to confirm the articles of 
Christianity, and to confute the enemies thereof. This is 
plainly insinuated by Origen, when he says, “ that the 
Holy Scripture exhorts us to learn logic in that place 
where it is said by Solomon, ‘ He that refuseth reproof,’ 
or logic, as he understandeth it, ‘ erreth ;’ and that there- 
fore he that instructeth others,” (the Greek word more 
particularly denotes the bishop,) ‘ought to be able to 
convince gainsayers.”* 

§ 11. Upon this examination of the candidates for the 
ministry, and their approbation by the presbytery, the next 
thing that followed was their being declared capable of 
their desired function, to which they were very seldom 
presently advanced, but first gave a specimen of their 
abilities in their discharge of other inferior ecclesiastic 
offices, and so proceeded by degrees to the supreme func- 
tion of all, as Cornelius, bishop of Rome, “ did not pre- 
sently leap into his office, but passing through all the 
ecclesiastical employments, gradually ascended there- 
unto.”*’ And as Aurelius, a member of the church of 
Carthage, “ began first with the lowermost office of a 
lector, though by his extraordinary merits he deserved 
those that were more sublime and honourable.”« 

§ 12. That this was their constant and unalterable 

a TIpotpérer kai 6 Seiog Adyog nude eri Sradextixyy, brov pév Yoa- 
ouavroc Aéyovtog Tadeia dé dvesédeyKToe 6Tt dei TOV Tpoicduevov 
Tod Adyou Suvatov eivat Tove avTiAéyovtag EAéyyerv. Contra Celsum, 
lib. 6, p. 279. 

> Non iste ad episcopatum subito pervenit, per omnia ecclesiastica 
officia promotus ad sacerdotii sublime fastigium cunctis religionis 


gradibus ascendit. Cyprian. Epist. 52, 94, p. 115. 
¢ Merebatur talis clerice ordinationis ulteriores gradus et incrementa 








96 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


practice I dare not affirm; I rather think the contrary, as 
I might easily prove, were it pertinent to my design ; this 
that follows is more certain, that whether they were gra- 
dually or presently ordained presbyters, their names were 
published or propounded to the people of that church where 
they were to be ordained, that so, if worthy of that office, 
they might have the testimony and attestation of the people ; 
or if unworthy and unfit, they might be debarred and ex- 
cluded from it, ‘‘ by which course the crimes of the wicked 
were discovered, the virtues of the good declared, and the 
ordination became valid and legitimate, being examined by 
the suffrage and judgment of all.’ 

§ 13. If the people objected nothing against the persons 
proposed, but approved their fitness for that office, the next 
thing that followed was their actual ordination in that par- 
ticular church where they were so propounded: not that 
they were only ordained for that particular church, but in it 
they were ordained ministers of the church universal, being 
at liberty either to serve that church where they received 
their orders, or, if they had a legal call, to spend their 
labours elsewhere, in other churches, as Origen was a 
presbyter of Alexandria, though he was “ordained in 
Palestina, by the bishops of Cesarea and Jerusalem,” and 
“Numidicus was a presbyter of the church of Carthage, 
though he received his orders elsewhere.”* Hence the 


majora, sed interim placuit ut ab officio lectionis incipiat. Idem. Epist. 
33, p. 77. 

a Ordinationes sacerdotales non nisi sub populi assistentis conscientia 
fieri oportere, ut plebe presente vel detegantur malorum crimina, vel 
bonorum merita predicentur, et sit ordinatio justa et legitima, que om- 
nium suffragio et judicio fuerit examinata. Cyprian. Epist. 68, § 4, 
p- 201. 

> Kavoapetac Te Kai ‘lepoooAtuwr éwioxowor yeipac cig mpecBuTépiov 
av7@ Tedetxact. Euseb. lib. 6, cap. 8, p. 209. 

¢ Numidicus presbyter adscribatur presbyterorum Carthaginensium 
numero. Cyprian. Epist. 35, p. 84, 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 97 


presbyters of a church were not confined to a set number, 
as the bishops and deacons were, but were sometimes 
more, sometimes less: as fit persons for that office pre- 
sented themselves, so were they ordained, some of whom 
still remained in the same church, where they received 
their orders ; and others went and served other churches, 
every one going where the providence of God did call 
him. 

§ 14. But now their formal ordination was by imposi- 
tion of hands, usually of the bishop and presbyters of the 
parish where they were ordained: for this there needs no 
other proof than that injunction of St. Paul to Timothy, 
1 Tim. iv, 14, “ Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which 
was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the 
hands of the presbytery.” 

As for imposition of hands, it was a ceremony that was 
variously used in the Old Testament, from whence it was 
translated into the New, and in the primitive church used 
on sundry occasions, to no purpose here to enumerate: 
one of those actions was, ordination of church officers, 
wherein, I think, it was never omitted. Thus Novatian 
was ordained a presbyter ‘“ by imposition of hands.”* And 
the bishops of Cesarea and Jerusalem “ imposed hands on 
Origen to make him a presbyter.”® The imposition of 
hands being the completion of ordination, or the final act 
thereof: for whosoever had past through the foremen- 
tioned examination and attestation, and consequently to 
that had received the laying on of hands, he was esteemed 
by all as legally ordained, and was ever after deemed to 
have sufficient power and authority to exert and discharge 


aKarygiady tov mpecButepiov Kata yap Tod éaioxdwov Tov emt. 
Sévtoe avTG yeipac eic mpeoButTepiov KAHpov. Cornel. apud Euseb, 
lib. 6, cap. 43, p. 245. 

> Xeipac cig mpeoButéptov ait@ TeVeckact. Apud Euseb. lib. 6, cap. 
8, p. 209. 


5 


98 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


the duty and office of the presbytership, to which, by those 
actions, he was advanced and promoted. 

§ 15. Here now I shall conclude what I designed to 
write, with respect to the first particular concerning the 
peculiar acts of the clergy, under which I have discoursed 
distinctly of the office, and order of bishops, priests, and 
deacons, as also of several other things relating to their 
charge and dignity. As for those other acts of theirs, 
which remain to be inquired into, [ shall not meddle with 
them here; for though they may have some rapport or 
connection to this head, yet they more properly and im- 
mediately respect the third, unto which place therefore I 
shall refer their discussion and examination. 


CHAPTER VI. 


§ 1. The peculiar acts of the laity proposed to be discoursed of. What 
were the qualifications of church membership. § 2. The people, in 
some cases, had power to depose their bishops. § 3. The conjunct 
acts of the clergy and laity proposed to be discoursed of. All eccle- 
siastical affairs were managed by their joint endeavours. 


§ 1. Havine in the former chapters treated of the pecu- 
liar acts of the clergy, I come now in this to speak some- 
thing to the peculiar acts of the laity, and to inquire into 
those actions and powers which they exerted distinctly by 
themselves. And here it may not be amiss, first of all, to 
make an inquiry into the constitution of the laity, that is, 
how and by what means they were at first admitted to be 
members of a church, by virtue of which membership they 
were made partakers of all those powers which we shall 
hereafter mention. 

Now for answer hereunto, in general, “all those that 
were baptized were looked upon as members of the church, 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 99 


and had a right to all the privileges thereof,”* except they 
had been guilty of gross and scandalous sins, as idolatry, 
murder, adultery, and such like ; for then they were cast 
out of the church, and not admitted again till, by a peni- 
tent and holy deportment, they had testified their grief 
and sorrow for their unholy and irregular actions; for as 
Origen saith, “ We do our utmost that our assemblies be 
composed of good and wise men.”» So that “none who 
are admitted to our congregations and prayers are vicious 
and wicked, except very rarely it may happen that a par- 
ticular bad man may be concealed in so great a number.”¢ 

But since the greatest part of Christians were adult 
persons at their conversion to Christianity, and admission 
into church fellowship and society, therefore we must 
consider the prerequisites of baptism, since that sacrament 
gave them a right and title to that admission or reception. 

Now those persons who designed to leave heathenism 
and idolatry, and desired to be members of a Christian 
church, were not presently advanced to that degree, but 
were first continued a certain space of time in the rank of 
the catechumens, or the catechised ones: these were can- 
didates of Christianity, who were to stay some time in that 
order for these two reasons: the one was, that they might 
be catechised and instructed in the articles of the Christian 
faith, from whence they were called catechumens: and 
the other was, “that they? might give demonstrations of 


Per baptisma Spiritus Sanctus accipitur, et sic a baptizatis et Spi- 
ritum Sanctum consecutis ad bibendum calicem Domini pervenitur. 
Cyprian. Epist. 63, § 5, p. 175. 

> Hueic yap 60n dbvauig ravta mpdtTomen drEp TOY Ppoviuwy dav- 
Opav yevéodar Tov abAdoyor judv. Contra Celsum. lib. 3, p. 143. 

© Ovreye év roic ovvedpevtovar Kal imi Tae Kowvac ebyag Epyouévac et 
Hy apa tLo oraving AavSdvwv év Toi¢ woAAoi¢ evpicKoito ToLodTOE. 
Origen contra Celsum. lib. 4, p. 178. 

4 Eici tivec tetaypévor mpoc TO pidomevceiv Tove Biove. Idem 
ibidem. p. 142. 


100 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


the reality of their intentions by the change of their lives 
and holiness of their conversations.” 

Whilst they were in this state, or rather in a preparatory 
thereunto, “they were first privately instructed at home,” 
till they understood the more intelligible principles of 
Christianity, and then they were admitted into the first 
rank of catechumens, who are called by Tertullian ‘“ edocti, 
or those that are taught.”» These were permitted ‘to 
come into the church, where they stood in a place by 
themselves,”* and “‘ were present at the sermons, which 
were adapted to their capacities, being discourses of the 
ordinary and less mysterious truths of the gospel.” If 
they behaved themselves well in this rank, then they were 
advanced to the “superior rank of the perfecti, or per- 
fect,”e £ as Tertullian calls them, who stayed not only at 
the lessons and sermons, but also at the prayers, which 
were the conclusion of the first service, and in a little 
time were baptized, and tarried with the faithful at the 
celebration of the eucharist, or the second service. 

This was the manner of admission amongst the an- 
cients ; none in those days were hastily advanced to the 
higher forms of Christianity, but according to their know- 
ledge and merit gradually arrived thereunto, being first in- 
structed at home, then admitted to the didactic part of the 

. public service, and then to the supplicative part thereof. 
It was the wicked policy of the heretics “ indifferently to 
pray and hear with all, making no difference between the 


a Kar’ idiav aitoic mpoerdcavtec. Idem ibidem. p. 142. 

> De Prescript. advers. Heret. p. 89. 

© Tyvixdde adtove elodyovow, dia pkv moigoavtec Taypa TOY dpTt 
dpyouévor kai eicayouévwv. Origen contra Celsum. lib. 3, p. 142. 

4 Tlapacwwrauev ta Baditepa Tove ovvepyouévoug Kai deouévoug 
Abywr moeotiKOc dvoualouévwv yadda. Idem ibidem. p. 143. 

°’Erepov 6: ro tov. Idem ibid. p. 142. 

‘ De Prescript. advers. Heret. p. 89. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 101 


faithful and the catechumens :”* but the true church dis- 
tinguished, and permitted not the catechumens to enjoy the 
privileges of the faithful till they had, in a sense, merited 
them, which was when, through a considerable time of 
trial, they had evidenced the sincerity of their hearts by 
the sanctity and purity of their lives, and then, as Origen 
saith, ‘‘ We initiate them into our mysteries when they 
have made a proficiency in holiness, and according to the 
utmost of their power have reformed their conversations.”® 
When they had changed their manners, and rectified their 
irregular carriages ; then they were washed with the wa- 
ter of baptism, and not before; for, as Tertullian saith, 
“ We are not baptized that we may cease to sin, but be- 
cause we have already ceased.”¢ 

As soon as they were baptized they commenced mem- 
bers of the church universal, and of that particular church 
wherein they were so baptized, and became actual sharers 
and exerters of all the privileges and powers of the 
faithful. 

§ 2. Now what the distinct and separate powers of the 
faithful were, must be next considered; several of them, 
to make the discourse under the former head complete, we 
touched there, as their election and choice of their bishops, 
their attestation to those that were ordained, and such like, 
which will be unnecessary and tedious to repeat here ; 
and others of them cannot be well separated from their 
conjunct acts with the clergy, but must, with them, be 
discoursed of in the next head, so that there will be little 


* Quis catechumenus, quis fidelis incertum est ; pariter audiunt, pa- 
riter orant. Tert. de Prescript. advers. Heret. p. 88. 

b’Exav dé oi mpoxémrovtec mapachowos TO Kexadap0a bro TOD 26- 
you, kal bon Obvapytc BéATLOV BeBtwxévat TO TyviKdde KaAoipev adTod¢ 
éi ta¢ Tap’ juiv TedeTac. Contra Celsum. lib. 3, p. 174. 

* Non ideo abluimur, ut delinquere desinamus, sed quia desinivimus. 
De Peenitentia, p. 379. 


102 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


or nothing to say here of their discretive and particular 
acts, save that, as they had power to elect their bishops, 
so, if their bishops proved afterward scandalous and 
grossly wicked in life, or at least heretical in doctrine, 
and apostates from the faith, they had power to depose 
them, and to choose others in their rooms. This I must 
be forced also to mention in another place, so that for the 
proof of it I shall urge only the case of Martialis and Ba- 
silides, two Spanish bishops, who, for apostacy and idol- 
atry, were deserted by their parishes, who elected Felix 
and Sabinus bishops in their steads. After this depo- 
sition Martialis and Basilides claimed the exercise of their 
episcopal authority, but their parishes denied it to them; 
and that they might not seem to act by a power which 
belonged not unto them, they sent to several bishops in 
Africa to know their judgment thereupon, who, being con- 
vened in a synod anno 258, whereof Cyprian was presi- 
dent, approved and commended their proceedings, assuring 
them “that it was according to the divine law, which was 
express, that none but those that were holy and blameless 
should approach God’s altar ; that if they had continued to 
have communicated with their profane bishops, they would 
have been accessaries to their guilt and villany, and 
would have contradicted those examples and commands 
in Scripture which oblige a people to separate from their 
wicked and ungodly ministers; that they had not acted 
irregularly in what they had done; since, as the people 
had the chief power of choosing worthy bishops, so also 
of refusing those that were unworthy :”* and many other 


a Desiderio vestro divina precepta respondent quibus jampridem man- 
datur voce celesti, et Dei lege prescribitur, quos et quales oporteat de- 
servire altari in Levitico precipit Dominus et dicit; homo, in quo 
fuerit macula et vitium non accedet offerre dona Deo——nee sibi plebs 
blandiatur quasi immunis esse a contagio delicti possit, cum sacerdote 
peccatore communicans Propter quod plebs obsequens preceptis 








THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 103 


such like passages are to be found in that synodical epis- 
tle, which flatly assert the people’s power to depose a 
wicked and scandalous bishop. 

But however, though the people had such a power ap- 
pertaining to them, yet, being subject td be guided by 
giddiness, envy, or pride, where churches were regularly 
associated, and their circumstances did permit it, they did 
not, by virtue of their power alone, upon their own single 
judgment, depose their bishop; but that their actions 
might be the more authentic and unquestionable, they had 
their complaints heard, and the whole affair examined by 
the synod to which they belonged, or by some other 
bishops, who, if their accusations were just and valid, 
might concur with them in the deposition of their bishop, 
and in the election of a new one: and from hence it is 
that we find the power of deposing bishops ascribed to 
synods, as Paulus Samosatenus, bishop of Antioch, was 
deprived by a synod held in that place,* and Privatus, 
bishop of Lambese, was deposed by a synod of ninety 
bishops.® ‘The same method being observed in the deposi- 
tion of a bishop as in his election. Asa bishop was elected 
by the people over whom he was to preside, and by the 
neighbouring bishops, so was he deposed by the same; both 
which things seem to be intimated in that passage of the 
forementioned synodical epistle, wherein it is said, that 
“the people chiefly have power either to choose worthy 
bishops, or to refuse unworthy ones.”* The word chiefly 


dominicis et Deum metuens, 4 peccatore preposito separare se debet, 
nec se ad sacrilegi sacerdotis sacrificia miscere ; quando ipsa maxime 
habeat potestatem vel eligendi dignos sacerdotes vel indignos recusandi. 
Epist. 68 apud Cyprian. § 1, 3, 4, pp. 200, 201. 

a Apud Euseb. lib. 7, cap. 30, p. 282. 

» Nonaginta episcoporum sententid condemnatum. Cyprian. Epist. 
55, § 11, p. 140. 

© Quando ipsa maximé habeat potestatem, vel eligendi dignos sacer- 
dotes, vel indignos recusandi. Apud Cyprian. Epist. 68, § 4, p. 201. 


104 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


implying, that, besides the people, some others were neces- 
sary to concur with them either in the election or depriva- 
tion of a bishop: and those were the neighbouring bishops, 
or, to speak more properly, that synod to which they ap- 
pertained ; of which synods, and of their power and au- 
thority, I shall discourse more largely elsewhere. 

§ 3. Having thus briefly despatched the second head, 
I now proceed to handle the third, which respects the 
conjunct acts of the clergy and laity; in answer where- 
unto I find that, in general, all things relating to the 
government and policy of the church were performed by 
their joint consent and administrations ; “ the people were 
to do nothing without the bishop :’”* and, on the contrary, 
‘he did nothing without the knowledge and consent of his 
people.”® ‘ When any letters came from foreign churches 
they were received and read before the whole church,”+ 
and “the whole church agreed upon common letters to be 
sent to other churches.”4 And so, for all other matters 
relating to the policy of the church, they were managed 
“by the common advice and counsel of the clergy and 
laity,”* both concurred to the discharge of those actions, 
to recite every particular act whereof would be extremely 
tedious and fruitless. Wherefore, in speaking hereunto, 
I shall confine myself to those of their complex acts that 
regarded the discipline of the church, which, being an 
answer to the second part of our inquiry, viz..—An Inquiry 
into the Discipline of the Primitive Church—shall be the 
subject of the following chapter. 

a”Avev Tov é@loKoTov, undev mpdocetv vudc. Ignat. Epist. ad 
Tralles. p. 47. 

> A primordio episcopatus mei statuerim, nihil sine consensu plebis 
mez privata sententia gerere. Cyprian. Epist. 6, § 5, p. 17. 

¢ Plebilegere te semper literas nostras. Cyp. Epist. 55, § 21, p. 144. 

4 Vicarias vero pro nobis, ego, et college, et fraternitas omnis, has 


ad vos literas mittimus. Idem Epist. 58, § 2, p. 163. 
© Incommune tractabimus. Cyprian. Epist. 6, § 5, p. 17. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 105 


CHAPTER VII. 


§ 1. The necessity, quality, and excellency of discipline. Six things 
propounded to be handled. 1. For what faults offenders were cen- 
sured. 2. Who were the judges that censured. 3. The manner of 
their censures. 4. What their censures were. 5. The course that 
offenders took to be absolved. 6. The manner of their absolution. 
§ 2. Censures were inflicted for all sorts of crimes, especially for idol- 
atry. §3. The whole church were the judges that composed the 
ecclesiastical consistory. ‘The executive power lodged in the clergy, 
and legislative both in clergy and laity. In difficult points some 
neighbouring bishops assisted at the decision of them. § 4. The 
manner of their censures. §5. Their censures consisted in excommu- 
nications and suspensions: the dreadfulness thereof. §6. The course 
that offenders took to be absolved: they first lay grovelling and weep- 
ing at the church doors. § 7. Then admitted into the rank of the 
penitents. ‘Their behaviour during their time of penance. § 8. How 
long their penance was. In some cases the fixed period anticipated ; 
when ended, the penitents were examined by the court, and if ap- 
proved, then absolved. § 9. The manner of their absolution. They 
came into the church with all expressions of sorrow, publicly con- 
fessed the sin for which they had been censured. The church was 
tenderly affected with their confession. 4 10. After confession they 
were absolved by the clergy’s imposition of hands. § 11. Then ad- 
mitted to the church’s peace. The clergy generally restored only to 
lay communion. 


§ 1. As all governments are necessitated to make use 
of laws, and other political means, to preserve their con- 
stitution ; so the church of Christ, which has a certain 
government annexed to it, that it may preserve itself from 
ruin and confusion, has certain laws and orders for the 
due regulation of her members, and penalties annexed to 
the breaches thereof. But herein lies the difference be- 
tween the one andthe other: the penalties and executions 
of the former are like its constitution, purely human and car- 
nal; but those of the other are spiritual ; as religion was at 
first received by spiritual and voluntary, and not by carnal 

5* 


106 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


and involufitary means; for, as Tertullian says, “It is not 
religion to force areligion, which ought to be willingly, not 
forcibly received.”* So by the same means it was conti- 
nued, and the penalties of the breach of it were of the 
same nature also. The church’s arms were spiritual, 
consisting of admonitions, excommunications, suspensions, 
and such like, by the wielding of which she governed her 
members, and preserved her own peace and purity. Now 
this is that which is called discipline, which is absolutely 
necessary to the unity, peace, and being of the church; 
for where there is no law, government, or order, that soci- 
ety cannot possibly subsist, but must sink in its own ruins 
and confusions. 

To recite the numerous encomiums of discipline that 
are interspersed in the writings of the ancients, would be 
an endless task: let this one suffice out of Cyprian: 
“‘ Discipline,” says he, “is the keeper of hope, the stay 
of faith, the captain of salvation, the fuel and nutriment of 
a good disposition, the mistress of virtue, that makes us 
perpetually abide in Christ, and live to God, and tend 
toward the heavenly and divine promises. This to follow 
is saving, but to despise and neglect is deadly. The Holy 
Ghost speaks in Psalm ii, 12, ‘ Keep discipline, lest the 
Lord be angry, and ye perish from the right way, when 
his wrath is kindled but a little against you.’ And again in 
Psalm 1, 16, ‘ But unto the sinner God said, What hast thou 
to do to declare my law, and to take my judgments into thy 
mouth? Thou hatest discipline, and castest my words 
behind thee.’ And again we read in Wisdom iii, 11, ‘ He 
that casteth off discipline is unhappy.’ And by Solomon 
we have received this command from Wisdom in Prov. 
ii, 11, ‘ My son, forget not the discipline of the Lord, nor 
faint when thou art corrected; for whom the Lord loveth 


2 Nec religionis est cogere religionem, que sponte suscipi debeat, non 
vi. Ad Scapulam, p. 447. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 107 


he correcteth.’ But if God corrects whom he loves, and 
corrects them that they may amend; Christians also, and 
especially ministers, do not hate, but love those whom they 
correct, that they may amend, since God hath also foretold 
our times in Jer. ili, 15, ‘ And I will give you pastors after 
mine own heart, and they shall feed you in discipline.’ 
Now this is that discipline, viz., the power and author- 
ity of the church exerted by her, for her own preserva- 
tion, in the censuring of her offending members, that I am 
now to discourse of; for the clearer apprehension whereof 
these six queries must be examined into: 1. For what faults 
offenders were censured. 2. Who were the judges that 
censured. 3. The manner of their censures. 4. What 
their censures were. 5. The course that offenders took 
to be absolved. And, 6. The manner of their absolution. 
§ 2. As to the first of these, for what faults offenders 
were censured. | answer, for schism,” heresy,* covet- 


* 


4 Disciplina custos spei, retinaculum fidei, dux itineris salutaris, fomes 
ac nutrimentum bone indolis, magistra virtutis, facit in Christo manere 
semper, ac jugiter Deo vivere, et ad promissa ccelestia et divina premia 
pervenire. Hance et sectari salubre est, et aversari ac negligere letale. 
In Psalmis loquitur Spiritus Sanctus: continete disciplinam, ne forte 
irascatur Dominus, et pereatis a via recta, cum exarscrit cito ira ejus 
super vos. Et iterum; peccatori autem dixit Deus, ad quid exponis 
justificationes meas, et assumis testamentum meum per os tuum? Tu 
autem odisti disciplinam, et abjecisti sermones meos retro. Et denuo 
legimus: disciplinam qui abjicit, infelix est. Et de Solomone mandata 
Sapientie monentis accipimus: fili ne neglexeris disciplinam Domini, 
nec defeceris ab eo correptus. Quem enim diligit Dominus corripit. Si 
autem Deus quem diligit, corripit, et ad hoc corripit, ut emendet ; fra- 
tres quoque, et maximé sacerdotes, non oderunt, sed diligunt eos quos 
corripiunt ut emendent ; quando et Deus per Hicremiam ante predixe- 
rit, et tempora nostra significaverit, dicens ; et dabo vobis pastores se- 
cundum cor meum, et pascent vos pascentes cum disciplina. De Dis- 
ciplina et Habitu Virginum, §. 1, pp. 265, 266. 

> So was Felicissimus in Cyprian. Epist. 38, § 2, p. 90. 

© Euseb. lib. 5, cap. 16, p. 181. 


108 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


ousness,* gluttony,’ fornication,’ adultery,’ and for all 
other sins whatsoever,* none excepted; nay, the holy and 
good men of those days were so zealous against sin, that 
they used the strictest severities against the least appear- 
ances of it, not indulging or sparing the least branch of its 
pestiferous production, but smartly punishing the least 
sprout of it, its lesser acts,as well as those that were more 
scandalous and notorious. Cyprian writes, that not only 
gravissima et extrema delicta, the greatest and most heinous 
crimes, but even minora delicta,! the lesser faults, were 
punished by their ecclesiastical courts, so cutting off sin 
in its bud, and, by the excision of its lesser acts and ebul- 
litions, preventing its more gross and scandalous eruptions. 
That particular sin which they most severely punished, 
and through the frequency of persecution had numerous 
objects of, was apostacy from the truth, or a lapsing into 
idolatry, which crime was always prosecuted with the 
extremest rigour; of which Ninus, Clementianus, and 
Florus, were sad instances, who, though they had for some 
time courageously endured their persecutions and _tor- 
ments, yet at last, through the violence thereof, and the 
weakness of their flesh, unwillingly consenting to the 
heathen idolatries, were for that fault forced to undergo 
three years penance; and, had it not been for their an- 
cient merits, must have underwent it much longer, as may 
be seen at large in the fifty-third epistle of Cyprian. And 
thus by these and such like severe and rigorous courses 
those primitive virtuosos endeavoured to prevent sin, and 
to make all the professors of the Christian religion truly 
holy and pious: for, as Origen saith, “ We use our utmost 


a Origen. Hom. 7 in Jerem. p. 94, vol. 1. > Origen. ibidem. 
© Cyprian. Epist. 52, § 13, p. 118. 4 Cyprian. Epist. 38, § 2, p. 90. 
® Origen. contra Celsum, lib. 3, p. 142. f Epist. 12, § 1, p. 37. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 109 


endeavours that our assemblies be composed of wise and 
honest men.”* 

§ 3. As for the judges that composed the consistory or 
ecclesiastical court, before whom offending criminals 
were convened, and by whom censured, they will appear 
to have been the whole church, both clergy and laity ; not 
the bishop without the people, nor the people without the 
bishop, but both conjunctly constituted that supreme tribu- 
nal which censured delinquents and transgressors, as will 
be evident from what follows. 

All the power that any church court exerted was de- 
rived from that promise and commission of Christ in 
Matthew xvi, 18, 19, “Thou art Peter; and upon this 
rock will I build my church, and the gates of hell shall 
not prevail against it. And I will give unto thee the keys 
of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind 
on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever thou 
shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” Now this 
power some of the ancients mention as given to the 
bishops. ‘Thus Origen writes, ‘that the bishops applied 
to themselves this promise that was made to Peter, teach- 
ing that they had received the keys of the kingdom of 
heaven from our Saviour, that so, whatsoever was bound, 
that is, condemned by them on earth, was bound in 
heaven ; and whatsoever was loosed by them, was also 
loosed in heaven; which,” says he, “ may be orthodoxly 
enough applied to them, if they hold Peter’s confession, 
and are such as the church of Christ may be built upon.” 

a'Hueic yap bon dtbvauic waévta rpdtTouey brép TOV dpoviswv av- 
dpov yevéodat Tov cbAdoyov yuGv. Contra Celsum. lib. 3, p. 143. 

b Eel 6& of TOV TémOY Tie éxioKxoTe ExOLKODYTEC YpOvTat TO PATO 
O¢ létpoc, nai tag KAcidac tig THv oipavdy Bactheiag aro TOU OwTH- 
poc eiAnddrec SuddoKover Te 7a br’ aiTav dedeuéva, TovTése Katadedt- 
kaopéva, kat év ovpavoic dedéoSar, Kai Ta UT’ avTY Gdeoly EtAngOTA, 
kal év obpavoic AcAvabat, AekTeov STL vyLOG AéyovoLy et ExovoLy Epyov 


110 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


And so also says Cyprian: “ The church is founded upon 
the bishops, by whom every ecclesiastical action is go- 
verned.’”* 

Others of the ancients mention this power as given to 
the whole church, according to that in Matthew xviii, 
15-18, “ If thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and 
tell him his fault between thee and himalone: if he shall 
hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. But if he will 
not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that 
in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be 
established. And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it 
unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let 
him be unto thee as a heathen man anda publican. Verily 
I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall 
be bound in heaven; and whatsoever ye shall loose on 
earth shall be loosed in heaven.” By the church here is 
to be understood the whole body of a particular church or 
parish, unto which some of the fathers attribute the power 
of the keys, as Tertullian: “If thou fearest heaven to be 
shut, remember the Lord gave its keys to Peter, and by 
him to the church.”® And Firmilian: “The power of re- 
mitting sin is given to the apostles, and to the churches 
which they constituted, and to the bishops who succeeded 
them.”* Now from this different attribution of the power 
of the keys, we may infer this, that it was so lodged both 


Ov’ 6 elpnrar éxeivO TO Ilétp@, od el Tlétpoc, kat ei THALKODTOL siciy &¢ 
é’ avtoic bo Xpicov oixodopeioSat thy ExkAnoiav Kal éx’ adTode ed- 
Aéywo TodTo dvagéport’ dv. Commen. in Mattheum, tom. 12, p. 279, 
vol. 1. 

@ Ecclesia super episcopos constituatur ; et omnis actus ecclesie, per 
eosdem prepositos gubermetur. Epist. 27,4 1, p. 62. 

> Si clausum putas ceelum, memento claves ejus hic Dominum Petro, 
et per eum ecclesie reliquisse. Scorpiac. p. 612. 

° Potestas remittendorum peccatorum apostolis data est, et ecclesiis 
quas illi a Christo missi constituerunt, et episcopis qui eis ordinatione 
vicaria successerunt. Apud Cyprian. Epist. 75, § 14, p. 240. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. lll 


in bishops and people, as that each had some share in it: 
the bishop had the whole executive, and part of the legis- 
lative power, and the people had a part in the legislative, 
though not in the executive. As for the executive power, 
by which I understand the formal pronunciation of suspen- 
sions and excommunications, the imposition of hands in 
the absolution of penitents, and such like, that could be done 
by none but by the bishop, or by persons in holy orders de- 
puted and commissioned by him, as the sequel will evince. 
But as for the legislative, decretive, or judicatorial power, 
that appertained both to clergy and laity, who conjunctly 
made up that supreme consistorial court, which was in 
every parish, before which all offenders were tried ; and, 
if found guilty, sentenced and condemned. 

Now that the clergy were members of this ecclesias- 
tical court, is a thing so evidently known and granted by 
all, as that it would be superfluous to heap up many quo- 
tations to prove it, so that I shall but just confirm it, after 
I have proved that which may seem more strange, and 
that is, that the laity were members thereof, and judges 
therein, being sharers with the clergy in the judicial 
power of the spiritual court: and this will most evidently 
appear by the consideration of these following testimo- 
nies. The first shall be out of that place of Clemens 
Romanus, where he writes, “ Who will say, according 
to the example of Moses, if seditions, contentions, and 
schisms, are happened because of me, I will depart, I will 
go wheresoever you please, and I will do what is enjoined 
me by the people, so the church of Christ be in peace.”* 

So Origen describes a criminal as appearing é7xi done 
tie éxxAnoiac, “before the whole church.” And Diony- 

alii dv éué cdowe Kal épic, kai oxiouata, éyywopd, aneyse ov éap 
BotAeotde, Kai 701d Ta Tpocacobueva brO Tod TARVOovG. Epist. 1 ad 


Corinth. p. 69. 
> Comment. in Matt. tom. 13, p. 335, vol. 1. 


112 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


sius, bishop of Alexandria, in his letter to Fabius, bishop 
of Antioch, speaks of one Serapion, that had fallen in the 
times of persecution, who had several times appeared be- 
fore the church, to beg their pardon, but “no one did ever 
take any notice of him.”* 

But Cyprian is most full in this matter, as, when two 
subdeacons and an acolyth of his parish had committed 
some great misdemeanors, he professes that he himself 
was not a sufficient judge of their crimes, but “ they ought 
to be tried by all the people.”® And concerning Felicis- 
simus the schismatic, he writes to his people from his 
exile, that, if it pleased God, he would come to them after 
Easter, and then that “ affair should be adjusted according 
to their abitrement and common counsel.”« And in another 
place he condemns the rash precipitation of some of his 
presbyters in admitting the lapsed to communion, because 
of some pacificatory libels obtained from the confessors, 
and charges them to admit no more till peace was restored 
to the church, and then they should “ plead their cause 
before the clergy, and before all the people.”4 And con- 
cerning the same matter he writes in another letter to the 
people of his parish, ‘“‘ that when it should please God to 
restore peace to the church, and reduce him from his 
exile, that then it should be examined in their presence, 
and according to their judgment.” 


2 Ovdeic tpoceivev avT@. Euseb. lib. 6, cap. 44, p. 246. 

> Hec singulorum tractanda sit, et limanda plenius ratio 
ipsa universa. Epist. 28, § 2, p. 64. 

© Secundum arbitrium quoque vestrum et omnium nostrum commune 
consilium ea que agenda sunt disponere pariter et limare poteri- 
mus. KEpist.40, § 1, p. 94. 

4 Acturi et apud nos, et apud plebem universam causam suam. Epis. 
10, § 4, p. 30. 

e Cum pace nobis omnibus a Domino prits data ad ecclesiam regredi 
cceperimus, tune examinabuntur singula presentibus ac judicantibus vo- 
bis. Epist. 12 ad Plebem, § 1, p. 37. 





cum plebe 





it a 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 113 


So that the consistory court was composed of the peo- 
ple, as well as of the bishop, each of whom had a nega- 
tive voice therein. On one side, the bishop could do no- 
thing without the people. So, when several returned from 
the schism of Fortunatus, and Bishop Cyprian was willing 
to receive them into the church’s peace, he complains of 
the unwillingness of his people to admit them, and the 
great difficulties he had to obtain their consent, as he thus 
describes it in his letter to Cornelius, bishop of Rome: “O, 
my dear brother, if you could be present with me when 
those men return from their schism, you would wonder at 
what pains I take to persuade our brethren to be patient, 
that, laying aside their grief of mind, they would consent 
to the healing and receiving of those that are sick; I can 
scarce persuade, yea, I extort a grant from my people, that 
such be received to communion.’”* And on the other side, 
the people could do nothing without the bishop; as when 
one of the three bishops that schismatically ordained No- 
vatian came back to the church, and desired admission, 
the people alone could not receive him without the consent 
of the bishop Cornelius; for else they would not have “so 
earnestly pressed him for his permission,”® as we find 
they did. 

Thus then we have viewed the members of the spiritual 
court, and have proved that they were all the members, or 
the whole body of the church, clergy as well as laity, and 
laity as well as clergy; not one without the other, but both 
together. 


2 O si posses, frater charissime, istic interesse nobiscum, cum pravi 
isti et perversi de schismate revertuntur, videres quis mihi labor sit per- 
suadere patientiam fratribus nostris, ut animi dolore sopito recipiendis 
malis curandisque consentiant ; vix plebi persuadeo, imo extorqueo, ut 
tales patiantur admitti. Epist. 55, § 17, p. 143. 

>*'Yrép aitot dentevtog xavtog tod mapdvtog Aaod. Cornel. apud 
Euseb. lib. 6, cap. 43, p. 244. 


114 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


But now, forasmuch as the people were encumbered 
with earthly business, and it was not possible that they 
could constantly give their attendance, and narrowly 
search into every thing that should be brought before them; 
therefore we may suppose that the members of the pres- 
bytery, who, as was said before under the head of Ordina- 
tion, were to be free from all worldly cares and employ- 
ments, were appointed as a committee to prepare matters 
for the whole court. An instance whereof we meet with 
in Maximus, Urbanus, Sidonius, and some others, that had 
joined in the schism of Novatian, who, being sensible of 
their fault, “came into the presbytery, and desired the 
church’s peace. The presbytery accepted of their sub- 
mission, and proposed it to the whole church, who readily 
embraced it.” 

So that the presbytery prepared matters for the whole 
court, which court was the supreme tribunal within the 
limits of that parish, before whom all matters that there 
occurred were tried, and by whom all were judged; only 
when any great and difficult points were decided, ’tis 
probable it was the custom to desire the bishops of the 
neighbouring parishes to come over and assist there in 
presence, that so their censures might be the freer from 
any imputation of partiality or injustice. ‘Thus when a 
nice affair was to be determined at Rome, Cornelius “ de- 
sired five bishops to assist, that so what they did might 
be firm and indisputable.» 

§ 4. Having thus found out the members of the ecclesi- 
astical tribunal, the next thing to be considered is the 
manner and form of their proceedings in the exercise of 





2In presbyterium venerunt Quod erat consequens, omnis hic ac- 
tus populofuerit insinuandus. Cyprian. Epist. 46, § 2, 3, pp. 104, 105. 

> Adfuerunt episcopi quinque ut firmato consilio, quid cirea per- 
sonaim eorum observari deberet, consensu omnium statueretur. Cornel. 
ad Cyprian. Epist. 46, § 2, p. 104. 





THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 115 


their judicial power and authority, which by Tertullian is 
described to be after this manner: When at their general 
assemblies the other parts of divine worship were ended, 
“then followed exhortations, reproofs, and a divine cen- 
sure; for the judgment is given with great weight, as 
amongst those that are sure that God beholds what they 
do; and this is one of the highest preludiums and fore- 
runners of the judgment to come, when the delinquent is 
banished from the communion of prayers, assemblies, and 
all holy commerce. Approved elders preside there, who 
obtained that honour by testimony, not by price.”* So 
that when the consistory was sat, the bishop and his as- 
sisting presbyters, here called approved elders, but com- 
monly the presbytery, presided and moderated all things 
there proposed and debated. Then the offenders, if pos- 
sible, were actually brought before them, (though the non- 
appearance of the criminals was no impediment to their 
proceedings,) for notwithstanding they condemned them, 
and censured them not only for those crimes for which 
they were cited to appear, but also for their contumacy 
and stubbornness, as Cyprian writes: “The proud and 
obstinate are killed with the spiritual sword, whilst they 
are cast out of the church ;”» and “ those that are stubborn, 
and fear not God, but go off from the church, let no man 
accompany.” But yet, I say, if possible, the offenders 
personally appeared, that so their crimes might be objected 


a Tbidem etiam exhortationes, castigationes, et censura divina; nam 
et judicatur magno cum pondere, ut apud certos de Dei conspectu, 
summumque futuri judicii prejudicium est, si quis ita deliquerit, ut a 
communicatione orationis, et conventus, et omnis sancti commercii re- 
legetur. President probati quique seniores, honorem istum non precio 
sed testimonio adepti. Apolog. cap. 39, p. 709. 

> Spirituali gladio superbi et contumaces necantur, dum de ecclesia 
ejiciuntur. Epist. 62, § 3, p. 170. 

© Contumaces et Deum non timentes, et ab ecclesia in totum rece- 
dentes, nemo comitetur. Epist. 64,4 4, p. 191. 


116 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


to them, to which they were to plead, as Cyprian says, that 
the lapsed “ were to plead their cause before the clergy 
and the whole church.”* Then the court considered the 
defendant’s plea, as Cyprian writes, “that all things were 
debated in common amongst them.”> And if the bishop 
and majority of the court judged their defence insufficient, 
they were voted by their common suffrage to be condemned 
and censured, as Cyprian writes, that ‘““ whoever was ex- 
communicated, it was by the divine suffrages of the peo- 
ple.”* The delinquent being thus cast, or found guilty, the 
next thing that succeeded was, the formal declaration of the 
sentence of the court, which was pronounced, as Tertullian 
intimates, in that forequoted passage, by one of the pre- 
siding elders; that is, either by the bishop or a presbyter 
commissioned by him: the manner of which pronunciation 
seems also from that passage to be thus: he that passed 
the formal sentence on the criminal first began with ex- 
hortations ; that is, as we may reasonably suppose, he 
exhorted the faithful to use all diligent care and fear to 
avoid those sins and crimes which had brought the offend- 
ers before them to so lamentable and fatal condition. Then 
followed reproofs, which were sharp rebukes and repre- 
hensions to the delinquents for their foul miscarriages and 
enormous practices, setting forth the evil, villany, and 
misery of them; that they were provoking to God, griev- 
ous to the faithful, scandalous to religion, and, -in fine, 
ruining and pernicious to themselves, in that it rendered 
them obnoxious to that divine censure, which then imme- 
diately, as the conclusion of all, he formally pronounced 
on them. Which brings me to the consideration of the 


a Acturi et apud nos, et apud plebem universam causam suam. Epist. 
10, § 4, p. 30. 

> In commune tractabimus. Epist. 6, § 5, p. 17. 

© Secundum vestra divina suffragia conjurati. Epist. 40 ad Plebem. 
§ 1, p. 92. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 11% 


fourth query, viz., What the primitive censures were ; of 
which in the following section. 

§ 5. Now in answer hereunto: As the church, so her 
arms, were spiritual: her thunderbolts consisted in sus- 
pensions and excommunications, in ejecting and throwing 
out of the church her scandalous and rotten members, not 
permitting a reinduction of them till, by visible signs of 
repentance, they had satisfied for their crimes and vil- 
lanies. 

Various are the appellations that are given to the sen- 
tence of excommunication in the writings of the ancients. 
By Dionysius Alexandrinus it is called, “‘a driving away 
from the church :’”* by Tertullian, “a casting out from the 
-church’s communion,”® and “a driving from communion ;”¢ 
by Cyprian, ‘a separation from the church,”? “an ejec- 
tion out of the church,”* “a killing with the spiritual 
sword ;”f and many other such like terms occur in the 
fathers, all tending to describe the fearfulness and misery 
of an excommunicated state. So tremendous was it that 
whosoever was in that condition was looked upon as ac- 
cursed by God, and really was so by men, who esteemed 
him as a limb of Satan, and a member of the devil, shun- 
ning his company as they did the plague, or any other in- 
fectious disease. ‘ Those,” says Cyprian, “that are 
proud, and fear not God, but go off from the church, let no 
man accompany.”€ And therefore Ireneus, speaking con- 
cerning the heretics who were all excommunicated, says, 

2 ’AmeAdoac Tig éxkAnoiac. Apud Euseb. lib. 7, cap. 7, p. 253. 

> Ab ecclesie communicatione abjectus. De Prescript. advers. He- 
ret. p. 95. 

¢ A communicatione depellere. De Monogam. p. 477. 

4 Ab ecclesia separari. Epist. 38, § 2, p. 90. 

© De ecclesia se pellerent. Epist. 40, § 1, p. 92. 

f Spirituali gladio necantur. Epist. 62, § 3, p. 170. 


8 Contumaces et Deum non timentes, et ab ecclesia in totum rece- 
dentes, nemo comitetur. [Epist. 65, 4 4, p. 191. 


118 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


that, ‘ according to the command of Paul, we must avoid 
them ; and John forbids us so much as to wish them God 
speed, since by so doing we communicate with their evil 
works.”* And Tertullian, in that forementioned place, 
writes, “ that the delinquent was banished from the com- 
munion of prayers, assemblies, and all holy converse ;”> 
being looked upon as one unworthy of human society, cast 
out of the church of God here, and, if impenitently dying 
in that condition, as certainly excluded the kingdom of 
God hereafter. For, as Origen writes on Matthew xviii, 
18, on which text excommunication is founded, “he that 
is condemned and bound by the church on earth, remains 
bound, none in heaven unloosing him.”« 

§ 6. No wonder, then, that men in their right senses 
were aflrighted at the tremendous misery of an excommu- 
nicated condition, and that, when through their corrupt 
natures and wicked practices they had incurred that sen- 
tence, they never left fasting, watching, weeping, and the 
endurance of the severest courses of mortification till they 
were absolved from it, and reinstated in God’s and the 
church’s favour; which brings me, in the next place, to 
search into the course that offenders took to be received 
into the church again, the usual method whereof seems to 
have been thus :— 

All those that desired to be delivered from that misera- 
ble state, in the first place, in a most penitent and humble 
manner, came weeping and crying unto the church doors, 


a Quos Paulus jubet nobis devitare, Joannes enim non Ave nobis eis 
dici volens. Qui enim dicit, inquit, eis Ave, communicat operibus eo- 
rum nequissimis. Lib. 1, cap. 13, p. 63. 

b+ A communicatione orationis, et conventus, et omnis sancti com- 
mercii relegetur. Apol. cap. 39, p. 709. 

©'O rovodroc Sedeuévoc b70 Tod ToLovdl, péver DedEuévoc, ovdEevdg TOV 
év obpave avadtovtog Tov dednKétog abTyy Thy Whdov. Comment. in 
Matt. tom. 13, p. 336, vol. 1. 








THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 119 


where they lay grovelling on the ground, prostrating them- 
selves at the feet of the faithful as they went into church, 
and begging their prayers to God for them. ‘The beha- 
viour of these men is thus elegantly expressed by the 
clergy of the church of Rome, in a letter to Cyprian: 
“ Let them,” say they, ‘‘ knock at the church doors, but 
not break them; let them come to the threshold of the 
church, but not pass over it; let them watch at the gates 
of the celestial tents, but armed with modesty, by which 
they may remember they were deserters ; let them resume 
the trumpet of their prayers, but not to sound an alarm to 
battle ; let them arm themselves with the darts of mo- 
desty, and retake that shield which by their apostacy they 
lost, that so they may be armed, not against the church, 
which grieves at their misery, but against their adversary 
the devil; a modest petition, a bashful supplication, a ne- 
cessary humility, and an industrious patience will be ad- 
vantageous to them: let them express their grief by their 
tears, and their sorrow and shame for their crimes by their 
groans.”* So Tertullian in the same manner describes 
one in this state: “by lying in sackcloth and ashes, by 
having a squalid body, and a dejected soul, by fasting, 
praying, weeping, groaning, and roaring, night and day ; 
by throwing himself at the clergy’s feet, and kneeling 


2 Pulsent sane fores, sed non utique confringant ; adeant ad limen 
ecclesie, sed non utique transiliant. Castrorum celestium excubent 
portis, sed armati modestia, qua intelligant se desertores fuisse. Resu- 
mant precum suarum tubam, sed qua non bellicum clangant. Arment 
se quidem modestiz telis, et quem negando mortis metu fidei demiserant 
clypeum resumant, sed ut contra hostem diabolum vel nunc armati non 
contra ecclesiam, que illorum dolet casus, armatos se esse credant. 
Multum illis proficiet petitio modesta, postulatio verecunda, humilitas 
necessaria, patientia non otiosa; mittant legatos pro suis doloribus la- 
crymas ; advocatione fungantur ex intimo pectore prolati gemitus, dolo- 
rem probantes commissicriminis et pudorem. LEpist. 31 apud Cyprian. 
§ 7, p. 71. 


120 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


before the faithful, begging and desiring their prayers and 
pardon.’ 

§ 7. If the ecclesiastical court thought their repentance 
to be real, and those external expressions of sorrow and 
grief to proceed from suitable affections of heart, then they 
began to incline to some terms of remission and reconcilia- 
tion, and gave the delinquents some hopes of it by admitting 
them to come into the church, and to stay at some part of 
divine service, but not at the whole of it; to communicate 
with the faithful, till they had for a long space of time, which 
they then imposed on them, by their humble and modest 
carriage given good proofs of their sorrow and repentance. 

This fixed time of trial was called the time of penance, 
during which the penitent, as he was now called, appeared 
in all the formalities of sorrow, with a coarse habit, and 
a dejected countenance, continually fasting and praying, 
and lamenting and bemoaning the greatness and aggrava- 
tions of his sin and wickedness, as may be seen in sundry 
places of the fathers, all which to transcribe would be 
very tedious; wherefore I shall content myself with trans- 
lating a few elegancies, pertinent to this purpose, out of 
Cyprian’s book, “ De Lapsis,” wherein he thus inveighs 
against those who in a state of penance indulged them- 
selves in the delights and enjoyments of the flesh: “ Can 
we think that that man weeps with his whole heart, and 
with fastings, tears, and sighs, beseeches God, who from 
the very first day of his offence daily frequents the baths ; 
who, indulging to his gluttonous appetite this day, vomits 
up his undigested crudities the next day, and does not 
communicate of his meat and drink to the necessities of 


a Sacco et cineri incubare, corpus sordibus obscurare, animum mee- 
roribus dejicere, Jejuniis preces alere, ingemiscere, lachrymari, et 
mugire dies noctesque presbyteris advolvi, et caris Dei adgeniculari, 
omnibus fratribus legationes deprecationis sue injungere. De Peeni- 
tentia, p. 381. 








THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 121 


the poor? He that goes gay and jocund, how does he 
bewail his death? Does that woman weep and mourn, 
who spends her time in putting on splendid garments, 
and does not think upon the garment of Christ, which she 
lost? who seeks after precious ornaments and rich jewels, 
and does not bewail the loss of the heavenly and divine 
adorning? Although thou puttest on exotic garbs and 
silken garments, thou art naked; although thou beautifiest 
thyself with gold and pearls, without the beauty of Christ 
thou art deformed; and thou who diest thine hair, now 
leave it off inthis time of penance ; and thou who paintest 
thine eyes, wash it off with thy tears. If thou shouldst 
lose any one of thy dear friends by death, thou wouldst 
sorrowfully weep and howl, and express the greatness of 
thy sorrow by thy disregarded face, mourning garments, 
neglected hair, cloudy countenance, and dejected visage. 
Why, O wretch, thou hast lost thy soul, and wilt not thou 
bitterly weep, and continually lament?”= ‘“ Now there- 
fore pray and supplicate more earnestly, pass the day in 
weeping, the night in watching and crying, both night 


* Lamentari eum putamus ex toto corde, jejuniis, fletibus, planctibus, 
Dominum deprecari ; qui ex primo criminis die lavacra quotidie celebrat, 
qui epulis affluentibus pastus, et sagina largiore distentus, cruditates 
suas postridie eructat, nec cibos et potus suos cum pauperum necessi- 
tate communicat? Qui hilaris ac letus incedit, quomodo mortem su- 
am deflet? An illa ingemiscit et plangit, cui vacat cultum pretiose 
vestis induere, nec indumentum Christi, quod perdidit, cogitare? Acci- 
pere pretiosa ornamenta et monilia elaborata, nec divini et ccelestis or- 
natus damna deflere; tu licet indumenta peregrina et vestes sericas 
iduas, nuda es; auro te licet et margaritis gemmisque condecores, 
sine Christi decore deformis es. Et que capillos tuos inficis, vel nune 
in doloribus desine, et que nigri pulveris ductu oculorum lineamenta 
depingis, vel nunc lacrymis oculos tuos ablue. Si quem de tuis charis 
mortali exitu, perdidisses, ingemisceres dolenter, et fleres: facie incul- 
ta, vesta mutata, neglecto capillo, vultu nubilo, ore dejecto indicia mee- 
roris ostenderes. Animam tuam misera perdidisti Et non acriter 
plangis, non jugiter ingemiscis? De Lapsis, § 24, 25, p. 285. 

6 





122 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


and day in tears and lamentations, prostrate yourselves 
upon the ground, roll yourselves in dust and ashes; after 
having lost the garment of Christ, have no clothing here ; 
having tasted the devil’s meat, choose now to fast.”* 

§ 8. How long these penitentiary stations were cannot 
be defined, since they differed according to the quality of 
the offence and the offender, according to the circumstance 
of time, and the will and pleasure of the ecclesiastical 
court who imposed them. Some were in the state of pen- 
ance two years, some three, some five, some ten, some 
more, some even to their lives’ ends: but how long and 
rigorous soever their penance was, they were patiently, 
humbly, and thankfully to endure it the whole time, being 
not absolved till they had undergone “ the legal and full 
time of satisfaction.”» 

It is true, indeed, that in some extraordinary cases the 
prudence of the church saw fit to dispense with the usual 
length and severity of their inflicted discipline, as “ in 
case of death,”* “of an approaching persecution,” or 
“when a great multitude, and eminent leading persons,’ 
were concerned in the same offence; as in the case of 
Trophimus, which may be seen in the fifty-second epis- 
tle of Cyprian. Besides these, the confessors claimed the 
privilege of restoring penitents before the usual time ; 
which irregular and unreasonable practice of theirs caused 
great disturbances to the church of Carthage in the days 


@ Orare oportet impensius et rogare, diem luctu transigere, vigiliis 
noctes ac fletibus ducere, tempus omne lacrymosis lamentationibus 
occupare, stratos solo adherere cineri, in cilicio et sordibus volutari : 
post indumentum Christi perditum, nullum hic jam veile vestitum : post 
diaboli cibum malle jejunium. De Lapsis, § 28, p. 286. 

> Legitimum et plenum tempus satisfactionis. Cyprian. Epist. 59, 
$1, p. 164. 

¢ Urgere exitus ceeperit. Apud Cyprian. Epist. 13, § 1, p. 39. 

4 Lapsis pacem dandam esse, et eos ad prelium, quod imminet, ar- 
mari et instrui oportere. Apud Cyprian. Epist. 54, § 1, p. 132. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 123 


of Cyprian, which may be seen at large in several epistles 
extant in the beginning of his works. 

But, laying aside these unusual circumstances, the fixed 
period of penance was never anticipated; but how long 
and severe soever it was, the penitent cheerfully sub- 
mitted to it. 

When the appointed time of penance was ended, the pen- 
itent applied himself to the ecclesiastical court for absolu- 
tion, who “examined his demeanours and actions,”* which, 
if they approved and liked, they then proceeded to the for- 
mal assoyling of him, of which in the following sections. 

§ 9. On the appointed day for absolution, the penitent, 
or he that was now to be absolved, came into the church 
mourning and weeping, and expressing all external indi- 
cations of his internal sorrow: as when Natalis, a Roman 
confessor, was absolved for his joining with the Theodo- 
sian heretics, he came into the church, as it is related by 
an ancient nameless Christian, ‘* covered with sackcloth 
and ashes, throwing himself at the feet of the clergy and 
laity, and, with tears in his eyes, begging their pardon and 
forgiveness ;”’ it being looked upon as very proper that 
they should be admitted into the church “ by tears, not by 
threats ; by prayers, and not by curses.”¢ 

Hence, at this time, for the greater demonstration of 
their sorrow and humility, they were to make a public 
confession of their sin, styled by them exomologesis, which 
was, as Cyprian saith, “a confession of their great and 
heinous crime,’ and was a necessary antecedent to abso- 
lution ; inasmuch as it was the source and spring of all 

4 Inspecta vita ejus quiagit penitentiam. Cyp. Epist. 12, § 1, p. 37. 

>’Evdvoduevoy odxkov kat oxédov katatacduevorv, meta TOAARS 
orovdne Kat daxpiwy, Tpooreceiv KARpW Kal TOV AatKov TOAAR Te 
TH Senoer ypnoduevov. Apud Euseb. lib. 5, cap. 28, p. 197. 

© Non minis sed precibus et lamentationibus. Cyp. Epist. 55, § 18, 


p- 143. 
4 Exomologesin gravissimi atque extremidelicti. Epist. 11, § 1, p. 32. 





124 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


true repentance. For, as Tertullian observes, “ Out of 
confession is born repentance ; and by confession comes 
satisfaction.”* And in many places of Cyprian> the ne- 
cessity of confession is asserted ; for, as Tertullian says, 
** Confession as much diminishes the fault as dissimula- 
tion aggravates it: confession is the advice of satisfaction; 
dissimulation, of contumacy.”* And, therefore, he con- 
demns those who, through shame, deferred from day to 
day the publication of their sin, as ‘‘ more mindful of their 
shamefacedness than of their salvation: like those who 
have a disease in their secret parts, through shame con- 
ceal it from the chirurgeons, and so with their modesty die 
and perish.”* Confession, therefore, being so necessary, 
the greatest offenders were not exempted from it; as when 
Philip the emperor, as Eusebius calls him, or rather Philip, 
a prefect of Egypt, would have joined with the faithful in 
the church’s prayer, Bishop Babylas denied him admission 
because of his enormous crimes; nor would he receive 
him till he had made “a public confession of his faults.’’¢ 
And, accordingly, when one of those bishops that schis- 
matically ordained Novatian returned as a penitent, he 
came into the church weeping and “ confessing his sin ;”* 
where we may observe it is said in the singular number, 
“his sin,” 7d éavrod duéprnua, which intimates that the pen- 


4 Satisfactio confessione disponitur, confessione pcenitentia noscitur. 
De Peenitentia, p. 280. 

> Epist. 10, § 2, p. 30. Epist. 11, $1, p. 32. 

© Tantum relevat confessio delictum, quantum dissimulatio exagge- 
rat ; confessio enim satisfactionis consilium est, dissimulatio contuma- 
cie. De Penitentia, p. 380. 

* Pudoris magis memores quam salutis; velut illi qui in partibus ve- 
recundioribus corporis contracté vexatione, conscientiam medentium 
vitant, et ita eum erubescentia sua pereunt. De Peenitentia, p- 382. 

®* EgouoAoygoacda. Apud Euseb. lib. 6, cap. 34, p. 232. 

‘ "ESouoroyotpevoc To gavtod dudptnua. Cornel. apud Euseb. lib. 
6, cap. 43, p. 243. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 125 


itent’s confession was not only general, or for all his sins 
in the gross; but it was particular, for that special sin for 
which he was censured; consonant whereunto Cyprian, 
as before quoted, writes, that the penitent “ confessed his 
most great and heinous sin ;”* that is, that sin for which 
he was so severely punished. 

This confession of the penitents was made with all the 
outer signs of sorrow and grief, which usually so affected 
the faithful as that they sympathized with them in mourn- 
ing and weeping. Whence Tertullian exhorts the penitent 
not through shame to conceal, but from a true godly dis- 
position to confess his fault before the whole church, and 
to weep and mourn for it; “ since they, being his brethren, 
would also weep with, and over him.» And so, from the 
same consideration, Cyprian exhorted the lapsed to this 
penitent confession. ‘ With our tears,” saith he, “join 
your tears: with our groans couple your groans.”° 

§ 10. As soon as confession was over, then followed 
the formal absolution, which was thus: The person to be 
absolved kneeled down before the bishop and the clergy, 
who put their hands upon his head and blessed him; by 
which external ceremony the penitent was declaratively 
and formally admitted to the church’s peace. Thus Cyp- 
rian writes, that “they received the right of communion 
by the imposition of hands of the bishop and his clergy ;’4 
and that “no one can be admitted to communion unless 
the bishop and clergy have imposed hands on him.”¢ 

4 Exomologesin gravissimi atque extremidelicti. Epist. 11, 4 1, p. 32. 

> Ergo cum te ad fratrum genua protendis——eque illi cum, ac su- 
per te lacrymas agunt. De Peenitentia, p. 382. 

¢ Cum lacrymis nostris, vestras lacrymas jungite ; cum nostro gem- 
itu, vestros gemitus copulate. De Lapsis, § 27, p. 258. 

4 Per impositionem manus episcopi et cleri jus communicationis ac- 
cipiunt. Epist. 10, § 2, p. 30. 

® Nec ad communicationem venire quis possit, nisi prius illi et ab 
episcopo et clero manus fuit imposita. Epist. 12, § 1, p. 37. 


126 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


This being accounted the third and last general requisite 
for the reconciling of offenders, the two former being the 
undergoing a state of penance, and a public confession of 
their sin; ‘all which three are frequently mentioned toge- 
ther as such, by Cyprian, as where he says, “ Let offend- 
ers do penance a set space of time ; and, according to the 
order of discipline, let them come to confession; and by 
imposition of hands of the bishop and clergy, let them re- 
ceive the right of communion.”* And in other places he 
complains of the irregular and unadvised actions of some 
of his presbyters, that they admitted some of the lapsed 
to communion “ before they had undergone a due pen- 
ance, made a public confession of their sin, and had hands 
imposed on them by the bishop and clergy.”> 

§ 11. After the penitents were absolved by imposition 
of hands, then they were received into the communion of 
the faithful, and made partakers again of all those privi- 
leges which by their crimes they had for a while forfeited: 
only when an offending clergyman was absolved, he only 
was restored to communion as a layman, but never re- 
admitted to his ecclesiastical dignity. ‘Thus, when one 
of the schismatical bishops that ordained Novatian, re- 
turned to the church, he was deprived of his ecclesiastical 
office, and admitted only to “lay communion.”« So like- 
wise apostate or lapsed bishops were never restored again 
to their office. The reasons whereof may be seen in 
the sixty-fourth epistle of Cyprian. And therefore Basil- 


* Agant peccatores penitentiam justo tempore, et secundum discipli- 
nz ordinem ad exomolegesin veniant, et per impositionem manus epis- 
copi et cleri jus communicationis accipiant. Epist. 10, § 2, p. 30. 

> Ante actam peenitentiam, ante exomologesin gravissimi atque ex- 
tremi delicti factam, ante manum ab episcopo et clero in penitentiam 
impositam, offerre lapsis pacem, et eucharistiam dare audeant. Epist. 
11, § 1, p. 32: and almost the same words are repeated, Epist. 12, 
§ 1, p. 37. 

°’Exowwrqoauev wc Aaix®. Cornel. apud Euseb. lib. 6, cap. 43. p. 243. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 127 


ides, a lapsed bishop, ‘“ would have been extremely glad 
if the church would but have permitted him to communi- 
cate as a layman.”* But yet I’ suppose that for every 
fault clergymen were not deprived of their orders, but 
only according to the greatness of their crimes, and the 
aggravation of them, since I find that Maximus, a presby- 
ter of the church of Rome, who had been deluded into the 
schism of Novatian, was, upon his submission, “ restored 
by Cornelius to his former office.” 


CHAPTER VIII. 


$1. Of the independency of churches. § 2. Of the dependency of 
churches. 4 3. Of synods, and the several kinds of them. § 4. How 
often synods were convened. § 5. Who were the members of 
synods. § 6. By whose authority synods were convened. §'7. When 
convened, the manner of their proceedings, a moderator first chosen, 
what the moderator’s office was. § 8. Then they entered upon 
business, which had relation either to foreign churches, or their own ; 
with respect to foreign churches, their acts were only advising. 
§ 9. With respect to their own churches, obliging. The end and 
power of synods inquired into. 


§ 1. To that large discourse of the primitive discipline, 
which was the subject of the preceding chapter, it will be 
necessary to add this observation, that all those judicial 
acts were exerted in and by every single parish, every 
particular church having power to exercise discipline on 
her own members, without the concurrency of other 
churches ; else in those places where there might be but 


2 Satis sibi gratulans, si sibi vel laico communicare contingeret. 
Apud Cyprian. Epist. 68, § 7, p. 202. 

> Maximum presbyterum locum suum agnoscere jussimus. Cornel. 
apud Cyprian. Epist. 46, § 4, p. 105. 


128 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


one church for several miles round, which we may rea- 
sonably suppose ; the members of that church must have 
travelled several, if not scores of miles, to have had the 
consent of other churches, for the punishment of their 
offenders ; but there is no need to make this supposition ; 
since it was decreed by an African synod, “ that every 
one’s cause should be heard where the crime was com- 
mitted; because that to every pastor was committed a 
particular portion of Christ’s flock, which he was particu- 
larly to rule and govern, and to render an account thereof 
unto the Lord.”= And so another African synod, that 
decreed the rebaptizing of those that were baptized by 
heretics, thus conclude their synodical epistle to Pope 
Stephen, who held the contrary: ‘“‘ Whereas we know that 
some bishops will not relinquish an opinion which they 
have embraced, but, keeping the bond of peace and con- 
cord with their colleagues, will retain some proper and 
peculiar sentiments which they have formerly received ; 
to these we offer no violence, or prescribe any law, since 
every bishop has, in the administration of his church, free 
liberty to follow his own will, being to render an account 
of his actions unto the Lord.”» 

After these two synodical determinations, it might be 
thought needless to produce the single testimony of 


@ Statutum sit omnibus nobis, et equum sit pariter ac justum, ut uni- 
uscujusque causa illic audiatur, ubi est crimen admissum, et singulis 
pastoribus portio gregis sit adscripta, quam regat unusquisque et guber- 
net, rationem sui actus Domino redditurus. Apud Cyprian. Epist. 55, 
§ 16, p. 142. 

> Czterum scimus quosdam quod semel imbiberint nolle deponere, 
nec propositum suum facile mutare, sed salvo inter collegas pacis et 
concordie vinculo, quedam propria, que apud se semel sint usurpata, 
retinere ; qua in re nec nos vim cuiquam facimus, aut legem damus, 
cum habeat in ecclesiz administratione voluntatis sue arbitrium liberum 
unusquisque prepositus, rationem actus sui Domino redditurus. Apud 
Cyprian. Epist. 72, § 3, p. 217. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 129 


Cyprian, but that it shows us not only the practice of 
the bishops of his age, but also of their predecessors. 
“ Amongst the ancient bishops of our province,” saith he, 
“some thought that no peace was to be given to adulter- 
ers, for ever excluding them from the communion of the 
church; but yet they did not leave their fellow-bishops, or 
for this break the unity of the catholic church; and those 
that gave peace to adulterers, did not therefore separate 
from those that did not, but, still retaining the bond of 
concord, every bishop disposed and directed his own acts, 
rendering an account of them unto the Lord.”* 

Thus every church was, in this sense, independent ; 
that is, without the concurrence and authority of any other 
church; it had a sufficient right and power in itself to . 
punish and chastise all its delinquent and offending 
members. 

§ 2. But yet, in another sense, it was dependent, as 
considered with other churches, as part of the church 
universal. ‘“ There is but one church of Christ,” saith 
Cyprian, “ divided through the whole world into many 
members, and one episcopacy diffused through the numer- 
ous concord of many bishops.”® A particular church was 
not the whole church of Christ, but only a part or member 
of the universal one; and as one member of the natural 


2 Apud antecessores nostros quidam de episcopis istic in provincia 
nostra dandam pacem meechis non putaverunt, et in totum peenitentie 
locum contra adulteria clauserunt, non tamen 4 co-episcoporum suorum 
collegio recesserunt, aut catholice ecclesi# unitatem vel duritie vel 
censure sue obstinatione ruperunt, ut quia apud alios adulteris pax da- 
batur, qui non dabat de ecclesia separaretur, manente concordiz vinculo, 
et perseverante catholice ecclesie individuo sacramento, actum suum 
disponit et dirigit unusquisque episcopus, rationem propositi sui Domino 
redditurus. Epist. 52, § 13, p. 118. 

> Cum sit a Christo una ecclesia per totum mundum in multa mem- 
bra divisa, item episcopatus unus episcoporum multorum concordi nu- 
merositate diffusus. Epist. 52, § 13, p. 118. 

6* 


130 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


body hath a regard to all the other members thereof, so a 
particular church, which was but one member of the uni- 
versal, had relation and respect to the other members 
thereof. Hence, though the labours and inspections of 
the bishops were more peculiarly confined to their own 
parishes, yet, as ministers of the church universal, they 
employed a general kind of inspection over other churches 
also, observing their condition and circumstances, and 
giving unto them an account of their own state and 
posture; as Cyprian inspected that of Arles, giving this 
as his reason for it, that, “ although they were many pas- 
tors, yet they were but one flock, and they ought to 
congregate and cherish all the sheep, which Christ re- 
deemed by his blood and passion.”* And the clergy of 
the church of Rome thanked Cyprian that he had ac- 
quainted them with the state of the church in Africa; for, 
say they, “‘ We ought all of us to take care of the body of 
the whole church, whose members are distended through 
various provinces.” If the bishop of one church had any 
difficult point to determine, he sent to another bishop for 
his advice and decision thereon. As when Dionysius, 
bishop of Alexandria, had a critical cause to determine, 
he sent to Xystus, bishop of Rome, “ to know his opinion 
and counsel therein.”* And so when there was some dif- 
ference at Carthage about the pacificatory libels of the 
martyrs, Cyprian wrote to the church of Rome for their 
advice. For, said he, “ Dearly beloved brethren, both 
common reason and love require that none of these things 

« Nam etsi pastores multi sumus, unum tamen gregem pascimus, et 
oves universas quas Christus sanguine suo et passione quesivit, colli- 
gere et fovere debemus. LEpist. 67, § 6, p. 199. 

> Omnes enim nos decet pro corpore totius ecclesie, cujus per varias 
quasque provincias membra digesta sunt, excubare. Apud Cyprian. 
Epist. 30, § 4, p. 67. 

© Kai yap ovtwg adeAde ovuBovdaye déoua, Kai yvounv aitd rapa 
cov. Apud Euseb. lib. 7, cap. 9, p. 254 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 131 


that are transacted here should be kept from your know- 
ledge, but that we should have your counsel about eccle- 
siastical administrations.”* In these, and in many other 
such like cases, which would be needless to enumerate, 
there was a correspondence between the particular 
churches of the universal one. 

§ 3. But that which chiefly deserves our consideration 
was their intercourse and government by synodical as- 
semblies, that is, by a convocation of bishops, presby- 
ters, deacons, and deputed laymen of several particular 
churches, who frequently met together to maintain unity, 
love, and concord, to advise about their common circum- 
stances and conditions, to regulate all ecclesiastical or 
church affairs within their respective limits, and to man- 
age other such like things, of which I shall more largely 
treat in the end of this chapter. 

That which must be spoken of in this section is, the 
several kinds or sorts of synods, the most august and su- 
preme kind whereof was, a universal or cecumenical 
synod, which was a congregation of the bishops and depu- 
ties of as many churches as would please to come from 
all parts of the world. Of this sort I find but one within 
my limited space of the first three hundred years after 
Christ, and that was the council of Antioch that con- 
demned Paulus Samosatenus. Or if this will not pass for 
a general council, there was no such one before that of 
Nice, which was held anno 325; and so there was no one 
of this kind within that time to which I am confined. 

But those synods, which were very frequent within my 
prescribed time, were provincial synods; that is, as many 


a Et dilectio communis et ratio exposcit, fratres charissimi, nihil con- 
scienti# vestre subtrahere de his que apud nos geruntur, ut sit no- 
bis circa utilitatem ecclesiastice administrationis commune consilium. 
Epist. 29, p. 66. 

> Apud Euseb. lib. 7, cap. 30, p. 279. 


133 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


particular churches as could conveniently and orderly 
associate themselves together, and by their common con- 
sent and authority dispose and regulate all things that 
related to their polity, unity, peace, and order. What ex- 
tent of ground, or how many particular churches each of 
such synods did contain, cannot be determined; their 
precincts were not alike in all places, but according as 
their circumstances and conveniences would permit; so 
they formed themselves into these synodical assemblies, 
and were governed in common by those synods, who were 
called the synods of such or such a province; as we read 
in Cyprian of the “province of Arles, and the bishops 
therein.”* And Cyprian frequently speaks of the bishops 
of his province as the bishops “in our province,” and 
“throughout our province,”* and “throughout the pro- 
vince :”¢ and tells us, that “ his province was very large,’’® 
and that it was “the custom of his province, and almost 
all other provinces, that upon the vacancy of a parish the 
neighbouring bishops of that province should meet toge- 
ther at that parish to ordain them a new bishop.” 

§ 4. How often these provincial synods were convened 
is uncertain, since that varied according to their circum- 
stances and their respective customs. fF irmilian, bishop 
of Cesarea, in Cappadocia, writes, that in his province 
“they met every year.” And whosoever will consider 


4 Co-episcopis nostris in eadem provincia constitutis. Epist. 67, 
§1, p. 198. 

>In provincia nostra. Epist. 52, § 13, p. 118. 

¢ Per provinciam nostram. Epist. 42, § 2, p. 99. 

4 Per provinciam. LEpist. 55, § 18, p. 143. 

© Latius fusa est nostra provincia. Epist. 45, § 2, p. 103. 

f Apud nos et fere per provincias universas tenetur; ut ad eam 
plebem cui prepositus ordinatur, episcopi ejusdem provincie proximi 
quique conveniant. Epist. 68, § 6, p. 202. 

& Per singulos annos in unum convenimus. Apud Cyprian. Epist. 
75, §3, p. 236. 





THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 133 


the frequent synods that are mentioned in Cyprian, will 
find that in his province they met at least once, and some- 
times twice or thrice a year. 

§ 5. As for the members that composed these synods, 
they were bishops, presbyters, deacons, and deputed lay- 
men in behalf of the people of their respective churches. 
Thus at that great synod of Antioch that condemned Paulus 
Samosatenus, there were present ‘“ bishops, presbyters, 
deacons, and the churches of God ;’* that is, laymen that 
represented the people of their several churches. So also 
we read in an ancient fragment in Eusebius, that when the 
heresy of the Montanists was fixed and preached, “the 
faithful, in Asia, met together several times to examine it ; 
and, upon examination, condemned it.”’ So also, when 
there were some heats in the church of Carthage about 
the restitution of the lapsed, Cyprian writes from his exile, 
that the lapsed should be patient till God had restored 
peace to the church, and then there should “ be convened 
a synod of bishops, and of the laity who had stood firm 
during the persecution, to consult about and determine 
their affairs ;”* which proposition was approved by Moses 
and Maximus, and other Roman confessors, who liked the 
‘“‘ consulting of a synod of bishops, presbyters, deacons, 
confessors, and the standing laity ;”4 as also did the whole 
body of the clergy of the church of Rome, who were will- 
ing that that affair “ of the lapsed should be determined by 
the common counsel of the bishops, presbyters, deacons, 

a’Exioxoro: kal mpecBitepot, kai dudKovol, Kai ai éxxAnoiat Tod 
cot. Ex. Epist. Synod. apud Euseb. lib. 7, cap. 30, p. 279. 

& Tév yap Kata THY ’Aoiay TiCGy ele TOdTO ovveASOvTwY, &c. Apud. 
Euseb. lib. 5, cap. 16, p. 181. j 

© Ut episcopi plures in unum convenientes, presente et stantium 
plebe disponere omnia consilii communis religione possimus. Epist. 
14, § 2, p. 41. 

4 Consultis omnibus episcopis, presbyteris, diaconis, confessoribus, 
et ipsis stantibus laicis. Apud Cyprian. Epist. 26, § 4, p. 60. 





134 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


confessors and the standing laity.”* And thus, at that 
great council held at Carthage, anno 258, there were pre- 
sent eighty-seven “ bishops, together with presbyters, dea- 
cons, and a great part of the laity.”» 

§ 6. If it shall be demanded by whose authority and 
appointment synods were assembled, to this it will be re- 
plied, that it must necessarily have been by their own; 
because in those days there was no Christian magistrate 
to order or determine those affairs. 

§ 7. When a synod was convened, before ever they 
entered upon any public causes, they chose out of the 
gravest and renownedest bishops amongst them, one, or 
sometimes two, to be their moderator or moderators; as at 
the council held at Carthage, anno 258, Cyprian was mode- 
rator thereof. And so we read of the prolocutors of several 
synods that were assembled in divers parts of the world, 
to determine the controversies concerning Easter; as Vic- 
tor, bishop of Rome, was prolocutor of a synod held there.4 
Palmas, bishop of Amastris, moderator of a synod held in 
Pontus ; and Ireneus, bishop of Lyons, of another in 
France. Polycrates, bishop of Ephesus, presided over a 
synod of Asiatic bishops ;* and at a convocation in Pales- 
tina, there were two moderators,‘ viz., Theophilus, bishop 
or Cesarea, and Narcissus, bishop of Jerusalem. The 
ofice and duty of a moderator was to preside in the synod, 
to see all things calmly and fairly debated and decreed; and, 
at the conclusion of any cause, to sum up what had been de- 


4 Collatione consiliorum cum episcopis, presbyteris, diaconis, con- 
fessoribus, pariter ac stantibus laicis facta, lapsorum tractare rationem. 
Apud Cyprian. Epist. 31, § 5, p. 70. 

> Episcopis plurimis cum presbyteris et diaconis, presente eti- 
am plebis maxima parte. Act. concil. Carthag. apud Cyprian. p. 443. 

¢ Act. Concil. Carthag. ad caleem Oper. Cyprian. 

4 Apud Euseb. lib. 5, cap. 23, pp. 190, 191. 

® Apud Euseb. lib. 5, cap. 24; p. 191. 

 Apud Euseb. lib. 5, cap. 23, p. 190. 





THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 135 


bated and urged on both sides, to take the votes and suffrages 
of the members of the synod; and, last of all, to give his 
own. All this is evident in the proceedings of the coun- 
cil of Carthage, which are extant at the end of Cyprian’s 
works, Cyprian being moderator of that council. After 
all things were read and finished relating to the question 
in hand, he sums up all, telling the synod what they had 
heard, and that nothing more remained to be done but the 
declaration of their judgment thereupon. Accordingly, 
thereunto the bishops gave their respective votes and 
decisions ; and, last of all, Cyprian, as president, gave 
in his. 

§ 8. When the moderator was chosen, then they en- 
tered upon the consideration of the affairs that lay before 
them, which may be considered in a two-fold respect, 
either as relating to foreign churches, or to those churches 
only of whom they were the representatives. As for for- 
eign churches, their determinations were not obligatory 
unto them, because they were not represented by them ; 
and so the chief matter they had to do with them was to 
give them their advice and counsel in any difficult point 
which they proposed to them; as when the people of As- 
torga and Emerita, in Spain, had written to some African 
churches for their advice what to do with their two bishops 
who had lapsed in times of persecution: this case was 
debated in a synod held anno 258, whose opinion there- 
upon is to be seen in their synodical epistle, extant at 
large amongst the works of Cyprian, Epist. 68, p. 200. 

§ 9. But with respect unto those particular churches 
whose representatives they were, their decrees were bind- 
ing and obligatory, since the regulation and management 
of their affairs was the general end of their convening. 

Various and many were the particular ends of these 
synodical conventions, as for the prevention of injustice 
and partiality in a parish consistory: as, suppose that 


136 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


such a consistory had wrongfully and unrighteously cen- 
sured one of their members, what should that censured 
person do unless appeal to the synod to have his cause 
heard there, as Felicissimus did; who, after he was ex- 
communicated by his own parish, of which Cyprian was 
bishop, ‘“ had his cause heard before a synod, who ratified 
and confirmed the sentence of excommunication against 
him.”* And, therefore, we may suppose it to be for the 
prevention of partiality and injustice that in Lesser Asia 
“ offenders were usually absolved by the synod, which met 
every year.”» Synods also were assembled for the examin- 
ing, condemning, and excommunicating of all heretics with- 
in their limits, that so the faithful might avoid and shun them. 
As Paulus Samosatenus was condemned by the council of 
Antioch ;* for resolving of all difficult points that did not 
wound the essentials of religion, or had relation unto the 
discipline of the church; as when there was some scru- 
ple about the time of baptizing of children, a synod of 
sixty-six bishops met together to decide it.1 Andso when 
there was some disputes concerning the martyr’s power to 
restore the lapsed, “synods were to be assembled to de- 
cide them.”* But why do I go about to reckon up particu- 
lars, when as they are endless? Let this suffice in general, 
that synods were convened for the regulation and manage- 
ment of all ecclesiastical affairs within their respective 
jurisdictions: as Firmilian writes, that in his country 
“the bishops and presbyters met together every year to 


a Literas ad te college nostri manu sua subscriptas miserunt, qui au- 
ditis eis, quid senserint, et quid pronunciaverint, ex eorum literis disces. 
Cyprian. Epist. 42, § 5, p. 99. 

> Per singulos annos conveniamus ut lapsis fratribus per peeniten- 
tiam medela queratur. Firmil. apud Cyprian. Epist. 75, § 3, p. 236. 

¢ Euseb. lib. 7, cap. 30, p. 279. 4 Apud Cyprian. Epist. 59, p. 162. 

¢ In unum convenientes——disponere omnia possimus. Apud Cyp. 
Epist. 14, § 2, p. 41. 








THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. toe 


dispose those things which were committed to their 
charge.”* Here they consulted about the discipline, go- 
vernment, and external polity of their churches ; and what 
means were expedient and proper for their peace, unity, 
and order ; which by their common consent they enacted 
and decreed to be observed by all the faithful of those 
churches whom they did represent. 

He who denies this must be very little acquainted with 
the ancient councils, especially those which were held 
after the emperors became Christians. ‘The reason why 
we find not more synodical decrees of the three first cen- 
turies comes not from that they judicially determined none, 
or required not the observance of them; but from that 
either they were not careful, or the fury and violence of the 
times would not permit them to transmit them down to 
their successors ; or through the length of time they are 
lost, and scarce any thing besides the name of such synods 
are now remembered; and of multitudes neither names 
nor decrees are to be found; but yet there is enough es- 
caped the fury of persecution, and the length of time, to 
convince us that those synods did decree those things 
which they judged expedient for the polity, discipline, 
and government of those particular churches that were 
within their respective provinces, and required them to be 
observed by all the members thereof. 

Thus we find these following canons determined by 
several synods in Africa, viz. :— 

“That though a delinquent had not endured the whole 
time of penance, yet if he was very sick, and in danger 
of death, he should be absolved.’ 


@ Ut per singulos annos seniores et prepositi in unum conveniamus, 
ad disponenda ea que cure nostre commissa sunt. Apud Cyprian. 
Epist. 75, § 3, p. 236. 

> Statueramus Si periculum infirmitatis urgeret, pacem sub ictu 
mortis acciperent. Apud Cyprian. Epist. 54, § 1, p. 132. 





138 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


“That at the approach of a persecution, penitent offend- 
ers should be restored to the church’s peace.”* 

“'That penance should not be hastily passed over, or 
absolution be rashly and speedily given.” 

“That all lapsed and apostate clergymen should, upon 
their repentance, be only admitted to communion as lay- 
men, and.be never more capable of discharging or per- 
forming any ecclesiastical function.”© . 

“That no clergyman should be a curator or trustee of 
a last will or testament.”4 

And many other such like synodical decrees relating to 
the discipline and polity of the church are to be met with 
in Cyprian, which were ever accounted obligatory to 
all those parishes who lived within those respective pro- 
vinces, and had their representatives in those respective 
synods ; for to what purpose else did they decree them? 
It had been fruitless and ridiculous to have made frequent 
and wearisome journeys, with great cost and pains, to have 
debated and determined those things which they judged 
expedient for the church’s well-being, if, after all, it was 
indifferent whether they were obeyed or not. 

_ But that their decrees were binding is adjudged by an 

African synod of sixty-six bishops, held anno 254, “ who 
sharply rebuked a certain bishop called Therapius, for 
breaking the canons of a synod, and absolving a certain 
presbyter called Victor, before the time appointed by that 


a Censuimus Pacem dandam esse, et eos ad prelium, quod immi- 
net, armari et instrui oportere. Apud Cyprian. Epist. 54, §1, p. 182. 

> Ante legitimum et plenum tempus satisfactionis pax ei conce- 
deretur. Cyprian. Epist. 59, § 1, p. 164. 

© Decrevit ejusmodi homines ad penitentiam quidem agendam posse 
admitti, ab ordinatione autem cleri atque sacerdotali honore prohiberi. 
Apud Cyprian. Epist. 68, § 7, p. 202. 

d Statutum sit, ne quis de clericis et dei ministris tutorem vel 
curatorem testamento suo constituat. Apud Cyprian. Epist. 66, § 1, 
p- 195. 








THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 139 


synod was expired.”* Probably the breaker of those 
canons was to have been deposed or suspended, or some 
other severe punishment inflicted on him, since the bishops 
of this synod speak as if they had moderated the rigour 
of the canons against Therapius, in that “they were con- 
tented only with chiding him for his rashness, and with 
strictly charging him that he should do so no more.”» 

So another synod in Africa decreed, that ‘“ if any one 
should name a clergyman in his last will and testament 
for his trustee, no sacrifice should be offered for him after 
his death.”* What the meaning of this offering of sacrifice 
after his death is, I shall not show here, since I must treat 
ofitin another place. Accordingly, when Geminius Victor, 
bishop of Furnis, had, by his last will and testament con- 
stituted Geminius Faustinus, a presbyter, his trustee, Cyp- 
rian, bishop of Carthage, wrote unto the clergy and laity 
of Furnis touching this matter, wherein he informs them, 
“that he and his colleagues were very much offended that 
Geminius Victor had thus broken the canons of the synod; 
but that since he had done it, he hoped they would take 
care that he should suffer the penalty annexed to the breach 
thereof, that in conformity thereunto they would not men- 
tion him in their prayers, or make any oblation for him, 
that so the decree of the bishops, which was religiously 
and necessarily made, might be observed by them.”4 


@ Victori antequam peenitentiam plenam egisset, temeré Therapius, 
pacem dederit, que res nos satis movet, recessum esse a decreti nostri 
auctoritate. Apud Cyprian. Epist. 59, § 1, p. 164. 

> Satisfuit objurgare Therapium quod temere hoc fecerit, et in- 
struxisse ne quid tale de cetero faciat. Ibidem. 

© Censuerunt ne quis frater excedens, ad tutelam vel curam cleri- 
cum nominaret ; ac si quis hoc fecisset, non offerretur pro eo, nec sacri- 
ficium pro dormitione ejus celebraretur. Apud Cyprian. Epist. 66, 
§ 2, p. 195. 

4 Graviter commoti sumus ego et college mei, et ideo Victor, cum 
contra formam nuper in concilio a sacerdotibus datum, Geminium Fau- 





140 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


To these two instances we may add that of Martialis 
and Basilides, two Spanish bishops, who, for their falling 
into idolatry in times of persecution were deprived of their 
ecclesiastical functions, and adjudged never more to be 
admitted to the church’s communion in any other quality 
than that of laymen, which rigorous sentence an African 
synod defends, “from the authority of a general council, 
who had before decreed, that such men should only be 
admitted to repentance, but be for ever excluded from all 
clerical and sacerdotal dignities.”* 


stinum presbyterum ausus sit tutorem constituere, non est quod pro 
dormitione ejus apud vos fiat oblatio, aut deprecatio aliqua nomine ejus 
in ecclesia frequentetur, ut sacerdotum decretum religiose et necessa- 
rié factum servetur 4 nobis. Ibidem. § 1, 2, p. 195. 

a Maximé cum jampridem decretum est, ejusmodi homines ad pceni- 
tentiam quidem agendam posse admitti, ab ordinatione autem cleri atque 
sacerdotali honore prohiberi. Apud Cyprian. Epist. 68, § 8, p. 202. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 141 


CHAPTER IX. 


$1. Of the unity of the church, of schism, defined to be a breach of that 
unity. The unity of the church, and consequently the breach of it, 
to be differently understood, according to the various significations 
of the word church. § 2. The unity of the church universal consi- 
dered negatively and positively ; negatively, it consisted not in a uni- 
formity of rites, nor in a unanimity of consent to the non-essential 
points of Christianity. The rigid imposers thereof condemned as 
cruel and tyrannical. 4 3. Positively, it consisted in a harmonious 
assent to the essential articles of faith. The non-agreement therein 
called schism, but not the schism of the ancients. 4 4. How the 
unity of a church collective was broken; this neither the schism of 
the ancients. §5. The unity of a particular church consisted in two 
things, in the members’ love and amity each toward other, and in the 
people’s close adherence to their bishop, or parish church; the breach 
of the former sometimes called schism. §6.The breach of the latter, 
which was a causeless separation from their bishop, the schism of the 
ancients. In how many cases it was lawful for the people to separate 
from their bishop. § 7. A separation under any other pretence what- 
soever was that which the fathers generally and principally meant by 
schism, proved so to have been. 4§ 8. Farther proved from Ignatius, 
§ 9. Exemplified in the schism of Felicissimus and Novatian. § 10. An 
objection answered touching the schism of Novatian. How the 
schism of one particular church affected other churches. § 11. A 
summary and conclusion of this discourse concerning schism. 


§ 1. Havine in the precedent chapters discoursed of 
the constitution and discipline of the primitive church, I 
come now in this to treat of the unity thereof, which I had 
a very great inclination to search into, since by the due 
understanding thereof we shall the better apprehend the 
notion of the ancients concerning schism, because that 
schism is nothing else but a breach of that unity, as will 
most evidently appear from the quotations that we shall be 
forced to make use of in this chapter. 

Now that we may know what the breach of the unity 
of the church was, it is absolutely necessary first to know 


142 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


what the unity itself was ; for, till we understand its unity, 
it is impossible that we should understand the breach 
thereof. 

Now for the distinct apprehending hereof we must 
remember the various acceptations of the word church, as 
they are related in the beginning of this treatise, and, ac- 
cording to the different significations thereof, so must its 
unity be diversified, or be differently understood ; and ac- 
cording to the different manner of its unity, so must we 
apprehend the breach thereof. 

§ 2. If, in the first place, we reflect upon the word 
CHURCH, as signifying the church universal, or all those 
who, throughout the whole earth, profess faith in Christ, 
then we may consider its unity in this sense either nega- 
tively, wherein it did not consist; or positively, wherein 
it did exist. 

Negatively, it consisted not in a uniformity of rites and 
customs ; for every particular church was at liberty to 
follow its own proper usages: one church was not obliged 
to observe the rites of another, but every one followed its 
own peculiar customs. Thus with respect to their fast 
before Easter, there was a great diversity in the observa- 
tion of it; “in some churches they fasted one day, in 
others two, im some more, and in others forty hours ; but 
yet still they retained peace and concord, the diversity of 
their customs commending the unity of their faith.”* So 
also the feast of Easter itself was variously celebrated. 
The Asiatic churches kept it on a distinct day from the 
Europeans, but yet still they ‘“‘ retained peace and love, 
and for the diversity of such customs none were ever cast 


et * ‘ ” 4 e s ~ % ‘ a t .¥ A id 

4 Of pév yap olovtTat piav nuépav deiv adtod¢ vyncetverv, of dé dvo, ob 

dé Kai Theiovac, ol dé TecoapdKovTa Wpacg iuepivac TE Kal VUKTEPLYaG 

OVUmETPOvOL THY Nuépav AVTOV TaVTES OvTOL EipfvEevoay 7 SLadwria THE 

vyseiac THY Ouovolay THE Ticews ouvicyot. Tren. apud Euseb. lib. 5, 
cap. 24, p. 193. 


_ 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 143 


out of the communion ofthe church.”* So lhkewise writes 
Firmilian, ‘“ that in most provinces their rites were varied 
according to the diversities of names and places, and that 
for this no one ever departed from the peace and unity 
of the catholic church.”* So that the unity of the church 
universal consisted not in a uniformity of rites and usages. 

Neither, in the next place, did it consist in a unanimity 
of consent to the non-essential points of Christianity, but 
every one was left to believe in those lesser matters as 
God should inform him. ‘Therefore Justin Martyr, speak- 
ing of those Jewish converts who had adhered to the Mo- 
saical rites, says, that if they did this only through their 
weakness and imbecility, and did not persuade other 
Christians to the observance of the same Judaical customs, 
that “he would receive them into church fellowship and 
communion.”¢ 

Whosoever imposed on particular churches the observ- 
ance of the former of these two things, or on particular 
persons the belief of the latter, they were esteemed not as 
preservers and maintainers, but as violaters and breakers 
of the church’s unity and concord. 

An instance of the former we have in that controversy 
between the churches of the east and west touching the 
time when Easter was to be celebrated. For when Vic- 
tor, bishop of Rome, had excommunicated the eastern 
churches because they continued to observe that feast on 
a different time from the churches of the west, not only 
the bishops of the adverse party, but even those of his own 


a Eipyvevov kai ovdérote dia To eldog Toito amEeBAASyoay tives. 
Tren. apud Euseb. lib. 5, cap, 24, p. 193. 

> In plurimis provinciis multa pro locorum et nominum diversitate 
variantur, nec tamen propter hoc ab ecclesia catholice pace atque 
unitate aliquando discessum est. Apud Cyprian. Epist. 75, § 5, p. 237. 

¢ [IpoohauBdveodat kai Kowwveiv dravtwv O¢ duoonAdyxvolg Kai 
adeAdgoic detv. Dialog. cum Tryphon. p. 266. 


144 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


side, condemned him as rash, heady, and turbulent, and 
wrote several letters about this affair, wherein, as the his- 
torian writes, “they most sharply censured him.” 

As for the latter, we have an instance thereof in the 
controversy that was between Stephen, bishop of Rome, 
and Cyprian, bishop of Carthage, touching the validity of 
heretics’ baptism. For when Stephen anathematized Cyp- 
rian because he held the baptism of heretics to be null 
and void, other bishops condemned Stephen as a breaker 
and disturber of the church’s peace. And amongst others, 
Firmilian, a Cappadocian bishop, vehemently accuses him 
as such, because that he would impose upon others the 
belief of such a disputable point, which, says he, was never 
wont to be done, but ‘ every church followed their own 
different ways, and never therefore broke the unity and 
peace of the catholic church, which now,” saith he, ‘“Ste- 
phen dares to do, and breaks that peace which the ancient 
bishops always preserved in mutual love and honour.”® 
And therefore we find in the acts of that great council of 
Carthage convened to determine this matter, that when 
Cyprian summoned up the debates thereof, he dehorts his 
fellow bishops from the imposing humour and temper 
of Stephen: “It now remains,” saith he, “that every 
one of us declare our judgments concerning this matter, 
judging no man, or removing any one from our commu- 
nion, if he think otherwise than we do; for let none of us 
make himself a bishop of bishops, or, by a tyrannical ter- 
ror, compel his colleagues to the necessity of obeying.”¢ 

a TlAqntixotepov xadantouévwv. Euseb. lib. 5, cap. 24, p. 193. 

> Multa pro locorum et nominum diversitate variantur, nec tamen 
propter hoc ab ecclesie catholice pace atque unitate aliquando disces- 
sum est. Quod nunc Stephanus ausus est facere, rumpens adversum 
vos pacem, quam semper antecessores ejus vobiscum amore et honore 
mutuo custodierunt. 


¢ Superest ut de hac ipsa re singuli, quid sentiamus, proferamus, nemi- 
nem judicantes, aut 4 jure communionis aliquem, si diversum senserit, 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 145 


So that the forcing a belief in these lesser matters was 
cruelty and tyranny in the imposers thereof, who, for such 
unreasonable practices, were looked upon as enemies to, 
and violators of, the church’s concord, being the true 
schismatics, inasmuch as they were the cause of schism 
and division; unto whom therefore may be applied that 
saying of Ireneus, “That at the last day, Christ shall 
judge those who cause schisms, who are inhumane, not 
having the fear of God, but preferring their own advan- 
tage before the unity of the church, for trivial and slight 
causes rend and divide the great and glorious body of 
Christ, and, as much as in them lies, destroy it; who speak 
peace, but wage war, truly straining at a gnat, and swal- 
lowing a camel.’* 

§ 3. But, positively, the unity of the church universal 
consisted in a harmonious assent to the essential articles 
of religion, or in a unanimous agreement in the fundamen- 
tals of faith and doctrine. Thus Ireneus, having recited 
a creed, or a short summary of the Christian faith, not 
much unlike to the apostles’ creed, immediately adds, 
“The church having received this faith and doctrine, 
although dispersed through the whole world, diligently 
preserves it, as though she inhabited but one house, and 
accordingly she believes these things as though she had 
but one soul and one heart, and consonantly preaches and 
teaches these things as though she had but one mouth; 
for although there are various languages in the world, yet 


amoventes. Neque enim quisquam nostrum episcopum se esse episco- 
porum constituit, aut tyrranico terrore ad obsequendi necessitatem col- 
legas suos adigit. Concil. Carthag. apud Cyprian. p. 443. 

4 Judicabit eos qui schismata operantur, qui sunt immanes, non ha- 
bentes Dei dilectionem, suamque utilitatem potils considerantes, quam 
unitatem ecclesiz, propter modicas et quaslibet causas magnum et glo- 
riosum corpus Christi conscindunt et dividunt, et quantum in ipsis est, 
interficiunt, pacem loquentes, et bellum operantes, veré liquantes culi- 
cem et camelum transglutientes. Lib. 4, cap. 62, p. 292. 


7 


146 ; THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


the doctrine is one and the same; so that the churches in 
Germany, France, Asia, Egypt, or Libya, have not a dif- 
ferent faith; but as the sun is one and the same to all the 
creatures of God in the whole world, so the preaching of 
the word is a light that enlightens everywhere, and illu- 
minates all men that would come to the knowledge of the 
truth.”* Now this bond of unity was broken when there 
was a recession from, or a corruption of, the true faith and 
doctrine, as Ireneus speaks concerning Tatian, the father 
of the Encratites, that as long as his master, Justin Mar- 
tyr, lived, he held the sound faith, but after his death, 
“falling off from the church,”» he shaped that new form 
of doctrine. This unity of the church in doctrine, accord- 
ing to Hegesippus, continued till the days of Simeon Cle- 
opas, bishop of Jerusalem, who was martyred under Tra- 
jan; but after that false teachers prevailed, such as the 
Simonians, Marcionists, Valentinians, and others, “ from 
whom sprung false Christs, false apostles, and false pro- 
phets, who, by their corrupt doctrines against God and his 
Christ, divided the unity of the church.”* So that the 
unity of the church universal consisted in an agreement 


4 Hance igitur predicationem et hanc fidem adepta ecclesia quamvis 
dispersa in universo mundo, diligenter conservat, acsi in una eademque 
domo habitaret ; ac similiter iis fidem habet, acsi unam animam unum- 
que et idem cor haberet: atque uno consensu hec predicat, docet, ac 
tradit, acsi uno ore predita esset. Quamvis enim dissimilia sint in 
mundo genera linguarum, una tamen eademque est vis traditionis ; nec 
que constitute sunt in Germania ecclesie aliter credunt aut tradunt, nec 
que in Hispaniis, neque in Galliis, neque in Oriente, neque in Agypto, 
neque in Libya, aut in medio orbis terrarum fundate sunt. Sed quem- 
admodum sol creatura Dei unus et idem est in universo mundo, ita et 
predicatio veritatis ubique lucet, et illuminat omnes homines qui ad no- 
tionem veritatis venire volunt. Lib. 1, cap. 3, p. 36. 

>’Arocag Tig éxkAnoiac. Apud Euseb. lib. 4, cap. 29, p. 150. 

© "Ar ToUTwY evddypicTol, Wevdorpog~nTat, WevdardcoAot, olTLVvES 
éuéptoav THY Evwow THe éexkAnoiac PYopmuatlotc Adyotg KaTa TOD Bed 
kal kata Tob Xpicod abrod. Apud Euseb. lib. 4, cap. 22, p. 143. 





THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 147 


of doctrine, and the corruption of that doctrine was a breach 
of that unity, and whoever so broke it, are said to divide 
and separate the unity of the church, or, which is all one, 
to be schismatics. So Irenzus writes, that those that in- 
troduced new doctrines “ did divide and separate the unity 
of the church.” And Cyprian writes, that “the devil 
found out heresies and schisms, by which he might sub- 
vert the faith, corrupt the truth, and divide the unity.” 
But now, for distinction’s sake, the breach of this unity 
was commonly called heresy, and the word schism gene- 
rally applied to the breach of the church’s unity in another 
sense, of which more in other sections. 

§ 4. If, in the next place, we consider the word church 
collectively, as denoting a collection of many particular 
churches, in which sense it is once used in Cyprian,° then 
its unity may have consisted in a brotherly correspondence 
with, and affection toward each other, which they demon- 
strated by all outward expressions of love and concord, as 
by receiving to communion the members of each other, as 
Irenzus! mentions, was observed between the churches 
of Rome and Asia; in mutually advising and assisting one 
another by letters, or otherwise, of which there are fre- 
quent instances in the ancients, and especially in Cyprian’s 
epistles ; and in manifesting all other marks and tokens 
of their love and concord. Now this unity was broken 
when particular churches clashed with each other ; when, 
from being possessed with spirits of meekness, love, and 
charity, they were inflamed with hatred, rage, and fury 


@ Scindunt et separant unitatem ecclesie. Lib. 4, cap. 43, p. 278. 

> Diabolus hereses invenit et schismata, quibus subverteret fidem, 
veritatem corrumperet, scinderet unitatem. De Unitate Ecclesia, 
§ 2, p. 296. 

© In provincia Africa et Numidia ecclesiam Domini. Epist. 71, 
§ 4, p. 214. 

4 Apud Euseb. lib. 5. cap. 24, p. 193. 


148 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


against each other. A sad instance whereof we have in 
the controversy betwixt Cyprian and Stephen, or rather 
between the churches of Europe and Africa, touching the 
validity of heretical baptism, wherein those good men were 
so far transported with bitterness and rancour against each 
other, that they interchangeably gave such harsh language 
and invidious epithets as are too odious to name, which 
if the reader be curious to know, he may find too much 
of it in Cyprian’s epistles. 

Or if several particular churches had, for the promotion 
of peace, unity, and order, regularly disposed themselves 
into a synodical government and discipline, as was always 
done when their circumstances and conveniences would 
permit them; then whoever broke or violated their rea- 
sonable canons, were censured as turbulent and factious, 
as it hath been evidenced in the former chapter, and needs 
no farther proof in this, because that the schism of the 
ancients was not a breach of the church’s unity in this 
sense ; vlz., as denoting or signifying a church collective. 

§ 5. But schism principally and originally respected a 
particular church or parish, though it might consequen- 
tially influence others too. Now the unity of a particular 
church consisted in the members’ love and amity toward 
each other, and in their due subjection or subordination to 
their pastor or bishop: accordingly the breach of that unity 
consisted in these two things, either in a hatred and malice 
of each other, or, in a rebellion against their lawful pastor, 
or, which is all one, in a causeless separation from their 
bishop and those that adhered to him. 

As for the first of these, there might be envies and dis- 
cords between the inhabitants of a parish, without a formal 
separation from communion, which jars and feuds were 
called schism ; an instance whereof we find in the church 
of Corinth, unto whom St. Paul objected in 1 Cor. xi, 18, 
“‘ When ye come together in the church, | hear that there 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 149 


be divisions,” or, as it is in the original, cyiouara, schisms, 
“ amongst you.” Here there was no separate communion, 
for they all came together in the church, and yet there 
were schisms amongst them, that is, strifes, quarrels, and 
discords. And as far as I can perceive from the epistle 
of Clemens Romanus, which was written to appease an- 
other schism in the same church of Corinth, there were 
then only turmoils and differences, without any actual se- 
paration. But on this I shall not enlarge, because it is 
not what the ancients ordinarily meant by schism. 

§ 6. But that which they generally and commonly 
termed schism was, a rebellion against, or an ungrounded 
and causeless separation from, their lawful pastor, or their 
parish church. Now because I say that a causeless se- 
paration from their bishop was schism, it will be neces- 
sary to know how many causes could justify the people’s 
desertion of their pastor; and these, I think, were two, or, 
at most, three: the first was apostacy from the faith, or 
when a bishop renounced the Christian faith, and through 
fear of persecution embraced the heathenish idolatries, as 
was done in the case of Martialis and Basilides, two 
Spanish bishops,* and was justified by an African synod, 
as is to be seen throughout their whole synodical epistle, 
still extant amongst those of Cyprian’s; the second cause 
was heresy, as Irenzus saith, ‘‘ We must fly far off from all 
heretics.”» And Origen allows the people to separate 
from their bishop “ if they could accuse him of false and 
heretical doctrine.” 

A third cause was a scandalous and wicked life, as is 


@ Basilidem et Martialem libellis idololatrie commaculatos——episco- 
patum gerere, et sacerdotium Dei administrare non oportere. Epist. 
Synod. apud Cyprian. Epist. 68, § 1, p. 200. 

> Oportet longe fugere ab eis. Lib. 1, cap. 13, p. 63. 

¢ Si habueris accusationem doctrine pessime, et alienorum ab eccle- 
sia dogmatum. Homil. 7 in Ezechiel, 


150 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


asserted by an African synod held anno 258, whose ex- 
hortations and arguments to this purpose may be seen at 
large in their synodical epistle, still extant in Cyprian, 
Epist. Ixviii, p. 200, out of which several passages perti- 
nent to this occasion have been already cited in the sixth 
chapter of this treatise, to which I must refer the reader. 
Of this mind also was Irenezus before them, who writes, 
«“ That as for those presbyters who serve their pleasures, 
and have not the fear of God before their eyes, who con- 
tumeliously use others, are lifted up with pride, and se- 
cretly commit wickedness, from all such presbyters we 
ought to separate.”* Origen indeed seems to be of another 
mind, and thinks that the bishop’s immorality in life could 
not justify his parish’s separation. “He,” saith he, “that 
hath a care of his soul, will not be scandalized at my faults, 
who am his bishop, but, considering my doctrine, and find- 
ing it agreeable to the church’s faith, from me indeed he 
will be averse, but he will receive my doctrine according 
to the precept of the Lord, which saith, ‘ The scribes and 
Pharisees sit on Moses his chair; whatever, therefore, 
they say unto you, hear and do; but, according unto their 
works do not, for they say and do not:’ that scripture is 
of me, who teach what is good, and do the contrary, and 
sit upon the chair of Moses as a scribe or Pharisee ; the 
precept is to thee, O people; if thou canst not accuse me 
of false doctrine, or heretical opinions, but only beholdest 
my wicked and sinful life; thou must not square thy life 
according to my life, but do those things which I speak.”» 


4 Qui vero presbyteri serviunt suis voluptatibus, et non preponunt 
timorem Dei in cordibus suis, sed contumellis agunt reliquos, et princi- 
palis consessionis tumore elati sunt, et in absconsis agunt mala ab 
omnibus talibus alsistere oportet. Lib. 4, cap. 44, p. 278. 

> Qui curam habet vite sux, non meis delictis qui videor in ecclesia 
predicare scandalizabitur, sed ipsum dogma considerans, et pertractans 
ecclesie fidem, 4 me quidem aversabitur, doctrinam vero suscipiet, se- 





THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 1&3 


Now whether Irenaeus and an African synod, or Origen, 
be to be most credited, I leave the learned to judge, though 
I think they may be both nearer reconciled than they seem 
to be; lrenzus, and that synod, affirming that the people, 
of their own power and authority, might immediately, 
without the concurrent assent of other churches, upon the 
immorality and scandal of their bishop, leave and desert 
him; Origen restraining the people from present execu- 
tion, till they had the authority of a synod for so doing ; 
for thus he must be understood, or else he will contradict 
all other writers, it being avouched by all, that synods did 
depose all those bishops that were guilty of criminal and 
scandalous enormities, as Privatus, bishop of Lambese, 
was deposed by a synod of ninety bishops, “ for his many 
and heinous crimes.” 

§ 7. But now, excepting these three causes of apostacy, 
heresy, and immorality, it was schism in a parish to leave 
their minister, or to set up another bishop against him; for 
though they at first chose their bishop, yet, their bishop be- 
ing, on their choice, approved and confirmed by the neigh- 
bouring bishops, they could not dethrone him without truly 
assigning one of those forementioned causes ; for this was 
to gather a church out of a church, to erect a new altar 
and a new bishop, which could not be in one church; for, 
as Cyprian writes, ‘“‘ God is one, Christ is one, the church 
is one, the rock on which the church is built is one; 


cundum preceptum Domini, qui ait, supra cathedram Moysi sederunt 
scribe et Pharisei, omnia enim quecunque vobis dicunt audite et facite, 
juxta autem opera illorum nolite facere; dicunt quippe et non faciunt : 
iste sermo de me est, qui bona doceo, et contraria gero, et sum sedens 
supra cathedram Moysi quasi scriba et Phariseus; preceptum tibi est, 
O popule, si non habueris accusationem doctrine pessime, et alienorum 
ab ecclesia dogmatum, conspexeris vero meam culpabilem vitam, atque 
peccata, ut non habeas juxta dicentis vitam tuam instituere, sed ea fa- 
cere que loquor. Homil. 7 in Ezechiel. 
* Ob multaet graviadelicta. Cyprian. Epist. 55, 9 11, p. 140. 


152 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


wherefore, to erect a new altar, and constitute a new 
bishop, besides the one altar and the one bishop, is im- 
practicable; whosoever gathers here, scatters; so to do 
is adulterous, impious, sacrilegious, mad, and wicked.’ 
“From hence,” says Cyprian, “ schisms do arise, that the 
bishop is not obeyed; and it is not considered that there 
ought to be but one bishop, and one judge in a church at 
atime.” And, ‘ This is the rise and source of schisma- 
tics, that through their swelling pride they contemn their 
bishop, and so they go off from the church, so they erect 
a profane altar, and so they rebel against the peace of 
Christ, and the ordination and unity of God.”* And again, 
“From thence proceed schisms, that the bishop, who is 
but one, and presides over the church, is contemned by 
the proud presumption of men; and he that was thought 
worthy by God, is esteemed unworthy by men.”¢ And 
again, “The church is the people united to their bishop, 
and the sheep adhering to their pastor; the bishop is in 


4 Deus unus est, et Christus unus, et unaecclesia, et cathedra una 
supra petrum Domini voce fundata; aliud altare constitui, aut sacerdo- 
tium novum fieri, preter unum altare et unum sacerdotium, non potest : 
quisquis alibi collegerit, spargit, adulterum est, impium est, quodcunque 
humano furore instituitur, ut dispositio divina violetur. Epist. 40, § 4, 
p- 93. 

> Neque enim aliunde nata sunt schismata, quam inde quod sacerdoti 
Dei non obtemperatur, nec unus in ecclesia ad tempus sacerdos, et ad 
tempus judex vice Christi cogitatur. Epist. 55, § 6, p. 138. 

* Hi sunt ortus atque conatus schismaticorum malé cogitantium ut 
sibi placeant, ut prepositum superbo tumore contemnant, sic de eccle- 
sia receditur, sic altare profanum foris collocatur, sic contra pacem 
Christi, et ordinationem atque unitatem Dei rebellatur. Epist. 65, § 4, 
p- 193. 

4 Inde schismata et hereses oborte sunt, et orluntur, dum episcopus 
qui unus est, et ecclesie preest, superba quorundam presumptione 
contemnitur, et homo dignatione Dei honoratus indignus hominibus ju- 
dicatur. Epist. 69, § 4, p. 208. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 153 


the church, and the church in the bishop. Whosoever 
are not with the bishop are not in the church; and those 
do in vain flatter themselves, who, having not peace with 
God’s priests, creep about and privately communicate with 
some, as they think, when the catholic church is not di- 
vided, but connexed and coupled together by the unity of 
its agreeing bishops.”* Whosoever, therefore, should 
causelessly desert his bishop, and solicit others so to do, 
was a true schismatic, since, in so doing, “ he divided a 
portion of the flock with the bishop, separated the sheep 
from their pastor, and dissipated the members of Christ.’ 

From these quotations, then, it is apparent, that the 
primitive schism respected only a particular church, and 
consisted in a person’s separation from communion with 
his lawful bishop without a just and authentic cause ; 
when any one should set up a particular church in a parti- 
cular church, in opposition to the lawful bishop thereof, 
and should draw away the inhabitants of that parish from 
the communion of their legal minister, setting up distinct 
meetings and “conventicles,”* as Cyprian calls them. 
This was true schism; for, as Ignatius says, whoso- 
ever so assembled, “ were not congregated legally accord- 


@ Tl sunt ecclesia plebs sacerdoti adunata, et pastori suo grex adhe- 
rens, unde scire debes episcopum in ecclesia esse, et ecclesiam in epis- 
copo, et si qui cum episcopo non sunt, in ecclesia non esse, et frustra sibi 
blandiri eos, qui pacem cum sacerdotibus Dei non habentes obrepunt, et 
latenter apud quosdam communicare se credunt, quando ecclesia, que 
catholica una est, scissa non sit, neque divisa, sed sit utique connexa, 
et coherentium sibi invicem sacerdotum glutino copulata. Epist. 69, 
§ 7, p. 209. 

» Cum episcopo portionem plebis dividere, id est, 4 pastore oves, et 
filios a parente separare, et Christi membra dissipare. Epist. 38, § 1, 
p. 90. 

© Conventicula sibi diversa constituunt. De Unitat. Eccles. § 10, 
p. 299. 

7* 


154 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


ing to the command :’”* and “ whosoever officiated without 
the bishop, sacrificed to the devil.”® 

§ 8. This notion now of schism gives us a clear rea- 
son why we find in Ignatius so frequent and pathetic 
injunctions of obedience to, and unity with, our respective 
pastors, of avoiding all divisions, and closely adhering to 
them; because a deserting of them, or a separating from 
them, was a commission of this horrid and detestable sin 
of schism, as will appear from these following exhorta- 
tions and instructions of his, with which every leaf almost 
of his epistles are fraught and furnished :—‘ All you of the 
church of Smyrna obey your bishop as Jesus Christ did 
the Father, and the presbytery as the apostles ; and honour 
the deacons according to the command of God. Let no- 
thing of ecclesiastical services be done without the bishop. 
Let that communion only be esteemed valid which is 
performed by the bishop, or by one permitted by him. 
Wherever the bishop is, there let the people be; as 
where Jesus Christ is, there the catholic churchis. It is 
not lawful without the bishop, or one permitted by him, to 
baptize, or celebrate the eucharist. This is pleasing unto 
God ; that so, whatsoever is done may be firm and legal.”* 
‘“‘ Have respect unto your bishop, as God hath respect unto 
you. My soul for theirs that obey their bishop, presby- 


4My BeBaiwe kar’ évToAnv cvvadpoiceabar. Ad Magnes. p. 32. 

v'O Addpa émioK6Tov TL Tpdcowr, TH dLaB6Aw Adrpever. Epist. ad 
Smyrn. p. 7. 

© Tlévrec 7H émiokorw axodovdeite, O¢ "Incovce Xpicog TH Tatpi, Kat 
tT mpeoBuTepiw O¢ Toig amoséAog Tove JE drakdvous évrpéreote wo 
Gcod évroAnv. Mydsic yupic Tot éxtoxérov Ti mpacoéTH TOV avyKbv- 
Tov ele THy éxkAnoiar, éxeivn BeBaia edyapicia Hyeiodw, 7 bo TOV 
éxiokérrov ovoa, 7) @ av abtog éxitpéy: brov dv davy 6 éErtoKdTog, 
gel TO TAHVOC Ecw, orep Orrov av H Xpicd¢ "Inoode, éxet H KadoAuKH 
éxxAnota: obk e£bv écwv ywple Tod éxcoxérov obre Pantilery, obTE ayd- 
anv roveiv, GAN @ Gv éxeivoc dokiyudoyn, TodTO Kal TH Oe@ evdpecor, 
iva dodanie @ Kal BéCarov Tay 6 mpdooeTat. Epist. ad Smyrn. p. 6. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 155 


ters, and deacons, and with them let my part in God be.’ 
* Let us not resist our bishop, lest we be found resisters 
of God.”» “TJ exhort yqu to do every thing in the unity 
of God, the bishop se in the place of God, and the 
presbyters in the place of the council of the apostles, and 
the deacons performing the intrusted ministry of Jesus 
Christ. Let there nothing be in you that may divide you, 
but be united to your bishop and presidents. As, there- 
fore, Christ did nothing without the Father, being united 
to him, neither by himself, nor by his apostles, so do you 
nothing without the bishop and presbyters, nor privately 
withdraw from them, but assemble together, having one 
prayer, one supplication, one mind, and one hope.”* “ Flee 
all division; where the pastor is, there as sheep follow ; 
for there are many plausible wolves that seek to carry you 
away; but let them have no place in your unity. Who- 
soever are God’s and Jesus Christ’s, they are with the 
bishop ; and whosoever repenting shall come to the unity 
of the church, those shall be God’s, that they may live 
according to Jesus Christ. Be not deceived, my brethren, 
if any one follows a schismatic, or one that causeth divi- 
sion and separation, he shall not inherit the kingdom of 

aT émioxétw mpooéyete iva Kai 6 Oed¢ tuiv' avtupixvor eyo TOv 
drotaccopévory TO erioxdTH, TpeoBuTépotc, OLdKOvOLG’ Kal eT’ AVTaV 
pol TO peépog yévorto oyelv év Oe. Epist. ad Polycarp. p. 14. 

b My dvtitdocecSar TH éTLoKbTw, iva Gusev Oeod VroTacodbuEvol. 
Ad Ephes. p. 20. 

¢ Tlapaxare év duovoia Oeov onovddlete TadvTAa TEdooELY TpoKady- 
pévov Tod émtokérov ei¢ TOmov Oeod Kai TOV TpEecBuTépwY Eig TOTO 
ovvedpiov Tov arocéAwy, Kal THY OLaKOVveY TETLCEvMEVOV OLAKO- 
viav "Incod Xpicov undév écw év vutv 6 Ovvycetar vude peEploat, 
GAN évoSnte TH extoxdTH Kal Toig mpoKadnuévote orep ovv 6 
Kbplog avev Tov TaTpo¢ ovdev éxroinoe HvGpuevog Ov, ovTE dv’ EavTod ovTE 
Oia TOV drocéAwr, obTuC und? byeic aved Tod ExLOKOTOV Kal TOY TpEO- 
Butépwv pndev mpdconte, unde meipdonte evAoyov TO daiveodar idla 
vuiv GA ext Td abTo pia mpoceryy, pia deqowc, el vovc, ula EAmic. 
Epist. ad Magnesios, p. 33. 











156 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


God.’ ‘Respect the bishop, presbyters, and deacons ; 
do nothing without the bishop; keep your flesh as the 
temple of God; love unity, avoid schisms; be followers 
of Jesus Christ, as he was of his Father. Where division 
and wrath is, God dwells not. God, therefore, pardons 
all penitents, if they penitentially return to the unity of 
God and the presbytery of the bishop.”* And some other 
such like expressions there are in the epistles of this fa- 
ther, which evidently demonstrate schism to be nothing 
else than a causeless separation from our parish bishop or 
minister, and a wandering after, or an adhesion to, another 
false and pretended pastor. 

§ 9. But for the clearer proof that this was what the 
fathers meant by schism, it may not be altogether unne- 
cessary to add unto these quotations an example or two; 
for examples more convincingly instruct than bare testi- 
monies and citations. And here let us first view the 
schism of Felicissimus in the church of Carthage, as it is 
related in the 38th, 40th, and 55th epistles of Cyprian ; 
and we shall find it respecting only that particular church 
orparish. When Cyprian was elected bishop of Carthage, 
Felicissimus and others of his faction opposed him ; but, 


4 bevyete O& TOV pépLopLov 6rrov O& 6 ToLluny éciv éxel OC TPOBaTa 
aKodovbeite, T6AAOL yap AvKoL akLoricoL HOovR Kak} aiyuadwrifovow 
Tove Veodpouove, adn’ év TH EvoryTe tudv od éEFobowv TOTOY, ba0L yap 
Geov eioiv Kai "Inoot Xpicovd ovror péta Tod éxtoK6zov Eioiv, Kal boa 
av petavojoavtec EAS wow ent THY éEvdtnTa THE eKKAnoiac ovTOL OEod 
éoovrat iva wotv Kata "Insovv Xpicov Covtec. My rAavdode adeAdgol 
pov, eitic oxilovTe dxodovbei Baoireiav Oeotd od KAnpovouet, Epist. 
ad Philadelph. p. 40. 

>T6 émtoKxoTH TpocéexyeTE Kal TH TpECBTEpiw Kal SLakdvotc, Ywple 
TOU ETLOKOTOV MNOEV TOLEITE, THY CdpKa VUdV We vadVv OEod TypEiTe, THY 
Evwoly ayanaTe, TOE wEpLo“ovc devyeETe, pLyuntai yiveode Inood Xpto- 
TOU WE Kai adTOE TOD TaTpO¢ aiTO, Ov dé UépLopog Eciv Kal Opyy, OEed¢ 
ov KaTolKel, Tao obv peTavosow adier 6 Kiptoc, gay peTavonowoLy 
etc Evotyta Oeod Kai avvédpiov Tod éertoKxérov. Ibid. p- 43. 





THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 15% 


finding themselves too weak, and not powerful enough to 
balance his interest, they yielded to his promotion, but 
yet still retained a hatred against his person, and waited 
for a more favourable opportunity, and a plausible pretence 
to separate from him. It pleased God that Cyprian, some 
time after his advancement, was forced, by reason of the 
persecution, to withdraw and absent from his flock ; dur- 
ing which absence that faction made use of all means to 
lessen his interest, till they had made their party indiffer- 
ently strong, and then they broke out into an open separa- 
tion from him, forming themselves into a distinct meeting, 
creating a new bishop, erecting a new altar, and consti- 
tuting a new church. Now all this was acted in and 
respected only the particular parish of Carthage, without 
causing or attempting any separation in any other church 
or parish ; and yet this Cyprian calls schism, and excom- 
municates the actors in it as schismatics and breakers of 
the unity of the church, of his church actually, and of all 
the other churches of the church universal virtually; who, 
like the members of the natural body, are affected with 
the pains and convulsions of each other. 

So also the famous schism of Novatian respected only 
the particular church of Rome, being no other than his 
causeless separation from Cornelius, his lawful bishop, and 
his erecting separate conventicles against him, as may be 
read at large in those epistles of Cyprian that treat of this 
affair, and his book “ De Unitate Ecclesiz.” 

§ 10. But I foresee an evident objection against this 
restrained notion of schism; and, in particular, from the 
schism of Novatian, which I cannot well pass over with- 
out resolving, since the solution thereof will inform us in 
the manner how the schism of one particular church did 
affect other churches. Now the objection may be this: 
If schism respected only one particular church, whence 
then comes it to pass that we read of Novatian bishops, 


158 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


not only at Rome, where that schism first began, but in 
several other churches and parishes besides? Now to 
this I answer, that we must distinguish between the 
schism and the heresy of Novatian—had Novatian been 
only guilty of schism, in all probability his schismatical 
actions, as well as all other schisms before, would have 
ended in the same church where they began, and have 
proceeded no farther; but he having once engaged in his 
schism, and willing to continue it, that he might have 
some pretence for those enormous practices, he accused 
his bishop of remitting and loosing the reins of discipline, 
in communicating with Trophimus, and others, that had 
sacrificed to idols, as may be amply seen in the fifty-fifth 
epistle of Cyprian; consequently, for the justification of 
this accusation, he added this doctrine, as the character- 
istic dogma of his party, that the church had no power to 
absolve those who lapsed after baptism, but were to leave 
them to the tribunal of God. This was an error in doc- 
trine, invidious to the mercy of God, and injurious to the 
merits of Christ, as Cyprian shows at large in his fifty- 
fifth epistle. Every error in doctrine was called heresy. 
Accordingly Novatian is branded for this as a heretic ; 
whence the confessors, in their return from his party, con- 
fessed that in adhering to them “they had committed 
schisms, and been the authors of heresies.’ And in the 
same epistle they call Novatian ‘a heretic and a schisma- 
tic.”» So Cyprian also accuses the said Novatian of “ he- 
retical pravity,”* and calls his error “a schismatical and 
heretical error.”4 


* Commisisse se schismata, et heresis auctores fuisse. Cyprian. 
Epist. 46, § 1, p. 104. 

» Schismatico et heretico homine. Ibidem. § 3, p. 105. 

* Heretice pravitatis. Epist.47, § 1, p. 107. 

4 Schismaticys et hereticus error. Epist.51, §2, p. 111. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 159 


So that Novatian’s schism was accompanied with her- 
esy; which, as usual, was called after the name of its 
author ; and having many eminent persons to abet it, and 
a specious show of sanctity and mortification, it is no 
wonder that it spread itself into many other churches be- 
sides that where it was first hatched ; unto which we may 
also add their industrious endeavours to proselyte men 
unto their party, “running about,” as Cyprian writes, 
‘‘from house to house, and from town to town, to gain 
companions in their obstinacy and error.”* For many of 
them, really thinking themselves to be in the right, and 
believing others to be in the wrong, conceived it to be 
their bounden duty to leave their bishop if he would not 
leave his heresy, as they apprehended it to be. And, 
probably, several bishops of the orthodox, who were the 
legal pastors of their respective parishes, were, through 
their own ignorance and those men’s fair pretences, de- 
luded into the same uncharitable error with them, of de- 
nying the lapsed any pardon. But we need not guess at 
this as only probable, since we have an instance of it in 
Martian, the lawful bishop of Arles, concerning whom 
Cyprian writes to Stephen, bishop of Rome, that he had 
received advice from the bishops of that province, “ That 
Martian, of Arles, had jomed himself unto Novatian, and 
had departed from the unity of the church and the con- 
cord of the bishops, holding that heretical severity, that 
the consolations of divine pity and fatherly lenity should 
be shut against the penitent and mourning servants of God, 
who knock at the church with tears, sighs, and groans ; 
so that the wounded are not admitted to have their wounds 
healed; but, being left without any hope of peace or com- 


a Ostiatim per multorum domos, vel oppidatim per quasdam civitates 
discurrentes, obstinationis sue et erroris scissi sibi querant comites. 
Epist. 41, § 2, p. 97. 


160 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


munion, are thrown out to the rapine of wolves, and prey 
of the devil.”* 

So that it was not Novatian’s schism, but his heresy, 
that was diffused through other churches; his schism 
respected only his own church, but his heresy, which was 
a breach of the unity of the church universal, respected 
other churches also; so that in answer to the forenamed 
objection we need only say this, that there was no such 
thing as the objection supposes ; that is, that there were 
no bishops or followers of Novatian’s schism in other 
churches, but that those that were discriminated by his 
name were the bishops and followers of his heresy. 

But however, let us suppose the worst, viz., that all 
schismatics had been orthodox and sound in every point 
of faith, had been exemplary and pious in the discharge 
of every duty, had been guilty of no crime but their schism 
from their bishop and parish, and yet their schism might 
have influenced other churches and parishes too, and that 
I think these two ways :— 

1. If one or more churches had admitted to communion 
those that were excommunicated by their own church for 
schism, that church or those churches made themselves 
partakers of those men’s crimes, and involved themselves 
in the same guilt of division and schism with them; as 
Martian, bishop of Arles, was adjudged by Cyprian a schis- 
matic, “because he had joined with Novatian, when he 


a Martianus Arelate consistens Novatiano se conjunxerit, et a cathol- 
ice ecclesie unitate, atque d corporis nostri et sacerdotii consensione 
discesserit, tenens heretice presumptionis durissimam pravitatem, ut 
servis Dei pcenitentibus et dolentibus, et ad ecclesiam lachrymis et 
gemitu et dolore pulsantibus, divine pietatis et lenitatis paterna solatia 
et subsidia claudantur, nec ad fovenda vulnera admittantur vulnerati, 
sed sine spe pacis et communicationis relicti, ad luporum rapinam et 
predam diaboli projiciantur. LEpist. 67, § 1, p. 198. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 161 


had been before excommunicated.”* I do not here mean 
that a bishop or parish, to make themselves guilty, should 
actually or personally communicate with the author of the 
schism himself, much less in the church where he began 
his schism, but it was enough if they joined with his legates 
or messengers, or any of his followers in any church what- 
soever; and therefore neither an African synod,” nor An- 
tonius, an African bishop, would communicate with the 
legates of Novatian.< Nor would Cornelius join in com- 
munion with Felicissimus,? a schismatic of Carthage, 
when he came to Rome; but as he was excluded from 
communion in his own church, so likewise was he in that 
of Rome. 

2. It was the custom when any bishop was elected, to 
send news of his promotion to other bishops, as Cornelius 
did to Cyprian,* that so he might have their confirmation, 
and their future letters to the bishop of that church, to 
which he was promoted, might be directed unto him, as 
Cyprian did unto Cornelius ;f which custom of sending 
messengers to other churches, to acquaint them of their 
advancement to the episcopal throne, was also observed 
by the schismatics, and in particular by Novatian, who 
sent Maximus, a presbyter, Augendus, a deacon, Macheus 
and Longinus, unto Cyprian, to inform him of his promo- 


4 Cum Novatianus ipse, quem sequitur, olim abstentus et hostis ec- 
clesie judicatus sit. Epist. 67, § 2, p. 198. 

b Et cum ad nos in Africam legatos misisset, optans ad communica- 
tionem nostram admitti, hinc sententiam retulerint, se foris esse ccepisse, 
nec posse 4 quoquam nostrum sibi communicari. Cyprian. Epist. 67, 
§ 2, p. 198. 

© Cum Novatiano te non communicare. Cyp. Epist. 52, §1, p. 113. 

4 Felicissimum rejectum 4 te illic esse. Cyprian. Epist. 55, § 1, 
p. 137. 

e Tuas literas legimus. Cyprian. Epist.42, § 1, p. 99. 

f Literas nostras ad te direximus. Cyprian. Epist. 42, § 1, p. 99. 


162 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


tion to the see of Rome. Now if any bishop or church 
did knowingly approve the pretensions of the schismatical 
bishop, they broke the concord of the church, and became 
guilty of schism, as may be gathered from the beginning 
of an epistle of Cyprian’s to Antonius, an African bishop, 
wherein he writes him, “ that he had received his letter, 
which firmly consented to the concord of the sacerdotal 
college, and adhered to the catholic church; by which he 
had signified that he would not communicate with Nova- 
tian, but hold an agreement with Bishop Cornelius.”* And 
therefore when legates came to Cyprian both from Cor- 
nelius and Novatian, he duly weighed who was legally 
elected; and finding Cornelius so to be, he approved his 
election, “directed his congratulatory letters unto him,” 
‘refused to communicate with the schismatical messengers 
of Novatian,”¢ and “ exhorted them to quit their schism, 
and to submit to their lawfully elected bishop.’ 

So that, in these two respects, the schism of a particular 
church might influence others also, involving them in the 
same crime, creating quarrels and dissensions between 
their respective bishops, and so dividing the dischargers 
of that honourable office, whom God hath made one ; for, 
as Cyprian says, ‘as there is but one church throughout 


a Venerunt ad nos missi 2 Novatiano Maximus presbyter et Augen- 
dus diaconus, et Macheus quidam, et Longinus. Cyprian. Epist. 41, 
§ 1, p. 96. 

b Accepi literas tuas, concordiam collegii sacerdotalis firmiter obti- 
nentes et catholice ecclesie coherentes, quibus significasti cum Nova- 
tiano te non communicare, sed cum Cornelio coepiscopo nostro unum 
tenere consensum. Fpist. 52, § 1, p. 113. 

¢ Literas nostras ad te direximus. FEpist. 42, § 1, p. 99. 

4 A communicatione eos nostra statim cohibendos esse censuimus. 
Epist. 41, § 1, p. 96. 

e Nec mandare desistimus, ut perniciosa dissensione deposita—— 
agnoscant, episcopo semel facto, alium constitui nullo modo posse. 
Ibid. § 2, p. 97. 


—— 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 163 


the whole world, divided into many members ; so there is 
but one bishopric diffused through the agreeing number 
of many bishops.”* 

§ 11. But now that we may conclude this chapter, the 
sum of all that hath been spoken concerning schism is, 
that schism, in its large sense, was a breach of the unity 
of the church universal; but, in its usual and restrained 
sense, of a church particular: whosoever, without any 
just reason, through faction, pride, and envy, separated 
from his bishop, or his parish church, he was a true 
schismatic ; and whosoever was thus a schismatic, if we 
may believe Saint Cyprian, “ he had no longer God for 
his father, nor the church for his mother, but was out of 
the number of the faithful; and though he should die for 
the faith, yet should never be saved.’® 

Thus much, then, shall serve for that query concerning 
the church’s unity. The next and last thing that is to be 
inquired into is, the worship of the primitive church ; that 
is, the form and method of their public services, of read- 
ing, singing, preaching, praying, of baptism, confirmation, 
and the Lord’s supper; of their fasts and feasts; of their 
rites and ceremonies, and such like ; which I thought to 
have annexed to this treatise, but this being larger than I 
expected, and the discourse relating to the primitive wor- 
ship being like to be almost as large, I have for this, 
and some other reasons, reserved it for a particular tract 
by itself; which, if nothing prevents, may be exposed 
hereafter to public view and observation. 


4 Cum sit 4 Christo una ecclesia per totum mundum in multa mem- 
bra divisa, item episcopatus unus episcoporum multorum concordi nu- 
merositate diffusus. Epist. 52, § 16, p. 119. 

> Alienus est habere jam non potest Deum patrem, qui ecclesiam 
non habet matrem; tales etiam si occisi in confessione nominis fuerint, 
macula ista nec sanguine abluitur. De Unit. Eccles. § 5 and 12, pp. 297 
and 300. 





AN INQUIRY, ETC. 


PART II. 


CHAPTER I. 


§ 1. Of the public worship of the primitive church. § 2. In their assem- 
blies they began with reading the Scriptures. Other writings read 
besides the Scriptures. § 3. Who read the Scriptures, from whence 
they were read, and how they were read. § 4. Whether there were 
appointed lessons. § 5. After the reading of the Scriptures, there 
followed singing of psalms. §6. What psalmsthey sung. § 7. The 
manner of their singing. § 8. Of singing men, and of church mu- 
sic. § 9. To singing of psalms succeeded preaching. On what 
the preacher discoursed: how long his sermon was. § 10. The 
method of theirsermons. § 11. Who preached; usually the bishop; 
or, by his permission, any other, either clergyman or layman. 


§ 1. Havine in a former treatise inquired into the con- 
stitution, discipline, and unity of the primitive church, I 
intend in this to inquire into the worship thereof, which 
naturally divides itself into these two parts, into the wor- 
ship itself; and into the necessary circumstances thereof, 
as time, place, and such like; both which I design to 
handle: beginning first with the worship itself, wherein 
I shall not meddle with the object thereof, since all Pro- 
testants agree in adoring God alone through Jesus Christ: 
but only speak of those particular acts and services where- 
by, in the public congregation, we honour and adore 
Almighty God; such as reading of the Scriptures, singing 
of psalms, preaching, praying, and the two sacraments ; 
every one of which I shall consider in their order, as they 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 165 


were performed in the ancient parish churches. And, 
first, 

§ 2. When the congregation was assembled, the first 
act of divine service which they performed was the read- 
ing of the Holy Scriptures. ‘“ In our public assemblies,” 
says Tertullian, “the Scriptures are read, psalms sung, 
sermons preached, and prayers presented.”* So, also, 
Justin Martyr writes, that in their religious assemblies, 
first of all, ‘“‘the writings of the prophets and apostles 
were read.” 

But besides the sacred Scriptures, there were other 
writings read in several churches, viz., the epistles and 
tracts of eminent and pious men, such as the book of Her- 
mas,° called Pastor, and the epistles of Clemens Romanus 
to the church of Corinth, “‘ which were read in the public 
congregations of many churches.”¢ 

§ 3. He that read the Scriptures was particularly des- 
tinated to this office, as a preparative to holy orders, as 
Aurelius, whom Cyprian designed for a presbyter, ‘ was 
first to begin with the office of reading.”° The name by 
which this officer was distinguished was, in Greek, 6 dva- 
ywookorv,f in Latin, “ lector,”¢ both which signify, in 
English, a reader; or, as we now call him, a clerk. The 
place from whence the clerk read was an eminency erected 
in the church, that so all the people might see and hear 


@ Scripture leguntur, psalmi canuntur, adlocutiones proferuntur, et 
petitiones delegantur. De Amima. cap. 3, p. 530. 

> Ta arouvgnuovetuata TOV dToCéAwY, Kai Ta OVyypduaTa TOY Tpo- 
onTav avaylveokera. Apolog. 2, p. 98. 

© “Hoy kai éxxAnoiace iouev aito dednuoorevuévov. Euseb. lib. 3, 
cap. 3, p. 72. 

4 Tairny dé Kai év wAeicatg éxkAnoiate ext Tod KoLvod Jednuoocevpé- 
vnv. Euseb. lib. 3, cap. 16, p. 88. 

e Placuit ut ab officio lectionis incipiat. Epist. 33, p. 77. 

f Just. Martyr. Apolog. 2, p. 98. 

€ Tertul. de Prescript. advers. Heret. p. 89. 


166 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


him, which was called “ pulpitum,” or ‘a pulpit ;”* from 
which pulpit he read the Scriptures alone, and not others 
alternatively with him; it being his office only to read, 
whilst the congregation listened to him, as Cyprian writes 
that Celerinus, a lector, “read the law and the gospel to 
all the people.”» Celerinus only read, whilst all the peo- 
ple attended; and, therefore, when this duty was ended, 
it is described only “by the lector’s ceasing to read,”* and 
not by the people ceasing so to do. 

§ 4. How much the lector read at a time is uncertain, 
since they varied according to the circumstances of their 
condition. So writes Tertullian, that “they read the 
Scriptures according to the quality of their present times.”4 
And to the same purpose says Justin Martyr, that the clerk 
read “ until it was sufficient.”® 

§ 5. When the reading of the Scriptures was ended, 
then followed the singing of psalms. So says Tertullian: 
“The Scriptures are read and psalms sung.” ‘This was 
a considerable part of the Christians’ service; who, as 
Pliny writes, met together before day, “ to sing a hymn to 
Christ,”¢ it being useful to elevate the mind in heavenly 
raptures of praise and adoration, and to raise a pious soul 
into greater degrees of admiration of God’s love and 
bounty, whence such a soul is described by Clemens 
Alexandrinus, “to be continually blessing, praising, sing- 


a Cyprian. Epist. 33, p. 77, and Epist. 34, § 4, p. 81. 

> Plebi universe legat precepta et evangelium Domini. Epist. 
34, § 4, p. 81. 

¢ Tlavoayévov tov dvaytvooxovtog. Justin. Martyr. Apolog. 2, p. 98. 

4 Cogimur ad literarum divinaram commemorationem, si quid pre- 
sentium temporum qualitas aut premonere cogit aut recognoscere. 
Apolog. c. 39, p. 709. 

© Méypic éyywpet. Apolog. 2, p. 98. 

Scripture leguntur, psalmi canuntur. De Anim. cap. 3, p. 530. 

s Carmen Christo quasi Deo dicere. Epist. ad Trajan. 





THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 167 


ing, and presenting hymns to God, the Lord of all,” be- 
ing assisted by the Holy Spirit of God, ‘ without whose 
aid it was impossible to sing either in good rhyme, tune, 
metre, or harmony.” 

The Christians in those days condemned only the de- 
bauched bacchanalian singing and roaring, but commended 
the blessing and praising of God “by thanksgiving and 
singing of psalms,’* inasmuch that it was made one cha- 
racteristic distinction of a Christian. As Tertullian in- 
veighs against the marriage of a believing woman with an 
infidel because thereby she would be hindered from dis- 
charging the ordinances of the gospel, amongst which he 
enumerates singing of psalms; for then, says he, ‘ What 
would her husband sing to her,” or, “‘ What would she sing 
to her husband?’ And a little after he describes the 
happy condition of that couple who were both Christians, 
in that they did both join together in, and exhort one an- 
other to, the vigorous performance of God’s worship: 
‘“‘ psalms and hymns sound between those two, and they 
mutually excite one another who shall sing unto God 
best ;”¢ it being their daily employment, and recurring as 
often as they eat their meat. ‘Thus saith Clemens Alex- 
andrinus : “A good Christian’s life is a continued festival ; 
his sacrifices are prayers and praises; reading of Scrip- 


4’Aci aivodoa, tuvovea, evdoyoica, WaAdovoa. Stromat. lib. 6, 
p. 483. 

> Odd? PaAa Kai EipbSuUWC, Kai eupmeAde, Kal éupéTpwC, Kal cYULdoVWS 
duvijoas Tov watépa év Xpicd, éay uy Td Tvedpe, &c. Origen. de Orat. 


§ 6, p. 7. 

© Av ebyapiciac, Kai paruwdiac. Clem. Alex. Pedag. lib. 2, cap. 4, 
p- 121. 

4 Quid maritus suus illi? Vel marito quid illa cantabit? Ad Uxor. 
lib. 2, p. 431. 


€ Sonant inter duos psalmi et hymni, et mutud provocant, quis melius 
Deo suo canet. Ibidem. p. 433. 


168 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


tures before meat, and singing of psalms and hymns at 
meat.”* Hence in their feasts and banquets, “ when they 
drank to one another, they sung a hymn, therein blessing 
God for his inexpressible gifts toward mankind, both as to 
their bodies and souls.” 

I confess, indeed, that most of these quotations respect 
only private singing of psalms, and so they may seem to 
be somewhat alien from my purpose ; on which account I 
should not have mentioned them, but have wholly passed 
them over in silence, had it not been to have satisfied those 
who hold it unlawful to sing any psalms at all, in what 
manner soever; for if singing in private was usual and 
commendable, then, no doubt, public singing was so also. 

§ 6. What those psalms or hymns were that the primi- 
tive Christians sung, may be a question necessary to be 
resolved, which I take to be two-fold, either such as were 
taken out of the Holy Scriptures, and particularly out of 
the book of Psalms, or such as were of their own private 
composing. So writes Tertullian, that after the celebra- 
tion of the Lord’s supper, “ every one sung a hymn out of 
the Bible, or of his own composing.”« As for the singing 
of David’s psalms, the same father particularly mentions 
the one hundred and thirty-third psalm as sung in his days, 
‘‘O how good and pleasant it is for brethren to dwell to- 
gether in unity. This thou canst not easily sing, unless 
when thou suppest with many.”¢ As for the hymns that 


2 Fahuol 62 Kai buvoe wapa tov éciactv. Stromat. lib. 7, p. 523. 

> Tlapa métov WwaAnewv aAAHAoLe TpoTivouev Tov Oeov dokalovteg 
éxl 7H adV6rvu TOY dvSpureiov aroAatcewr OwpEed, TV TE Eig THY TOU 
oGpuatoc, TOY TE Eig THY THE WuxHe absjoLv Tpodar didiwg ExtyopnynD7- 
val. Stromat. lib. 6. p. 475. 

© Quisque de Scripturis Sanctis, vel de proprio ingenio provocatur in 
medium Deo canere. Apolog. cap. 39, p. 710. 

4 Vide quam bonum et quam jucundum habitare fratres in unum: 
hoc tu psallere non facile ndsti, nisi quo tempore cum compluribus coe- 
nas. Advers. Psychicos de Jejunio. p. 650. 





THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 169 


were of private men’s composition, it was one of the accu- 
sations of Paulus Samosatenus, the heretical bishop of 
Antioch, “that he abolished those psalms which were 
wont to be sung to the honour of the Lord Jesus Christ, 
as novel, and composed by modern authors; and that he 
appointed women, on Easter day, in the middle of the 
church, to sing psalms in his praise.”* And in the frag- 
ment of an anonymous author, extant in Eusebius, we find 
the heresy of Artemon, who denied the divinity of Christ, 
confuted not only by the Scriptures and the writings of 
the precedent fathers, but also “by the psalms and hymns 
of the brethren, which were formerly composed by them, 
wherein they praised Christ by making hima God.”» Such 
a private composed hymn was that which Clemens Alex- 
andrinus mentions, as one commonly known among the 
Christians in his days, beginning, yaipe ¢éc, or, “ Hail, 
Light.” Protreptic, p. 52. 

§ 7. As for the manner of the primitive singing, it was 
“in good tune and concent,”* all the people bearing a part 
in it; but whether all together, or antiphonally, cannot 
well be determined ; every country probably following its 
own mode, singing only in general being commanded, not 
the particular manner or fashion of it. In a precedent 
quotation? mention is made of singing, in concent, cupzgd- 
vec, or “ with voices all together.” In other places the 
alternative method of singing seems expressly to be used ; 


4 Yadwove dé Tove pév ei¢ TOV Kiptov nudv "Inooiv Xpicov rateoac, 
@¢ 6& vewTépovg Kat vEewTépwv GvdpOVv ovyypaupara, eic éavToV dF év 
féoy TH exkAnoia, TH wEeyddy TO’ Tacoya juépa Warpwdeiv yvvaikacg 
mapackevatwv. Act. Concil. Antioch. apud Euseb. lib. 7, cap. 30, 
p- 281. 

> Vakuoi dé d00t kai dai AdeAgdv ar’ dpync bro Ticdv ypadgeicat, 
Tov Adyov Tod Oeod TOV Xpicdv buvovot Seodoyodvtec. Lib. 5, cap. 28, 
p- 196. 

° ’Eupearae kal ovudovoc. Origen. de Oratione, § 6, p. 7. 

4 Origen de Oratione, § 6, p. 7. 

8 


170 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


as Pliny writes, that the Christians in his time met toge- 
ther before day, “to sing a hymn to Christ by course, or 
one against another.”* And so in that forecited passage 
of Tertullian, “ what will an unbelieving husband sing to 
a believing wife, or what will a believing wife sing to an 
unbelieving husband?” 

§ 8. As for singing men and singing women, [ find that 
Paulus Samosatenus, the heretical bishop of Antioch, 
abolished the old usual hymns, and “appointed certain 
women, on Easter day, in the middle of the church, to 
sing psalms in his praise.”* But whether these singing 
women were first instituted by this heretical bishop, or 
were before his time, I cannot tell. 

As for church music, for organs, and the like, those 
primitive ages were wholly ignorant of them; for it can- 
not rationally be conceived, that in those days of conti- 
nual persecution or violence, they could either use or 
preserve them; all that they looked after was, to sing in 
‘rhyme, metre, tune, and concent,”¢ to offer up unto God 
the praises of their voices, lips, and mouths, which Cle- 
mens Alexandrinus thinks was emblematized or shadowed 
forth by those musical instruments mentioned in Psalm 
cl, where, saith he, “ we are commanded to praise God 
on the psaltery, that is, on the tongue, because the tongue 
is the psaltery of the Lord; and to praise him on the 
harp, by which we must understand the mouth; and to 
praise him on the loud sounding cymbals, by which the 


4 Carmen Christo dicere secum invicem. Epist. ad Trajan. 

> Quid maritus suus illit Vel marito quid illa cantabit? Ad Uxor. 
lib. 2, p. 431. 

© Eic éavrov dé év péon EkkAnoia TH meyady Tod Tdoxa Huépa parp- 
wdeiv yuvaikac mapackevatwv. Apud. Euseb. lib. 7, cap. 30, p. 281. 

4 Riptduoc, Kai guperdc, kai éupetpwc, kai cuudovwc. Origen de 
Oratione, § 6, p. 7. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 171 


tongue is to be understood, which sounds or speaks through 
the knocking or coition of the lips.” 

§ 9. When the singing of psalms was ended, then suc- 
ceeded the preaching of the word. So writes Tertullian, 
“Scriptures are read, psalms sung, and then sermons 
pronounced.”® As for the subject of the preacher’s ser- 
mon, it was usually a commentary or explication of the 
lessons that were just before read. So it was in the time 
and country of Justin Martyr, who writes, that “‘ when the 
reader had ended, the bishop made a sermon, by way of 
instruction and exhortation to the imitation of those excel- 
lent things which had been read.”* Whence Origen calls 
their sermons “ explanations of the lessons.”4 And such 
explanations are all his sermons or homilies, as whoso- 
ever reads them will easily see ; and he himself intimates 
as much in several of them.° 

As for the length of their sermons, they usually preached 
an hour, as Origen complains of his abundance of matter, 
that if he should thoroughly handle every part of it, “it 
would require not only the one hour of their assembly, but 
several.”* Therefore, when the lessons were long and 
copious, which sometimes consisted of several chapters, 


* Aiveite aitov év padrnpiw, OTe 4 yA@TTAa TO WaArhpiov Kupiov, 
kal év xuddpa aiveite avrov, xudpa voeiodw Td coma aiveite avTov 
év KuuBdAow dAahaypov, KiuBakov tot céuatog THY yA@TTav Aéyet, 
H Tol¢ Kpsouévore éxnyel yeideot. Peadag. lib. 2, cap. 4, p. 121. 

> Scripture leguntur, psalmi canuntur, adlocutiones proferuntur. De 
Anima. cap. 3, p. 530. 

© Tlavoapuévov tov dvayivaoxovtoc, 6 mpoesag dia Adyou THv voute- 
Ciav, Kai TPOKANHOLY TH¢ TOV KAaA@Y TObTWY pLuncEwc ToLeiTaL. Apol. 
2, p. 98. 

4 Tév ei¢ Ta dvayvdocuata Oinynoewv. Contra Celsum. lib. 3, p. 142. 

¢ Homil. de Engastrim., and Homil. 17 in Jerem. 

f'Qpac ob plac ovvdsewc, GAAG Kai wAevovwr. Homil. de Engast. 
p. 29. 





172 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


as the lesson which was the subject of Origen’s fifteenth 
homily on Jeremiah reached from the fifteenth chapter 
and tenth verse to the seventeenth chapter and fifth verse, 
the preacher passed over some of the matter unmentioned, 
and handled the most important, or the most curious part 
therein. Thus in the beginning of a sermon of Origen’s 
we find that the chapters that were read were, the twenty- 
fifth, twenty-sixth, twenty-seventh, and twenty-eighth 
chapters of the first book of Samuel, which he complains 
“were too large and copious to be handled at once, and 
therefore he would only discourse of the twenty-eighth 
chapter, touching the witch of Endor, and those mis Oi 
related there concerning her.” 

§ 10. As for the manner of their sermons, we may ob- 
serve this method in those of Origen, that he first began 
with a short exordium, and then explained verse after 
verse, or sentence after sentence, showing the natural and 
literal signification of the words, and then the spiritual- 
ized or mystical meaning of them, and concluded with a 
suitable application of all, either “ by way of exhortation 
to piety and virtue, or by way of dehortation from vice 
and impiety.”” Always accommodating their discourses 
to the capacities of their hearers: “If their auditors were 
prudent and understanding, then they scrupled not to treat 
of the profound mysteries of the gospel; but if they had 
attained no great measure of knowledge, and had need 
of milk, as the apostle styles it, then they concealed from 
them those deep and recondite points.’ 


aTa dvayvwodévta TAeiova éct ov éxdcn mpdypata ovK dAcya 
Eyet Ta TEepl THC éyyaspiuiVov. Homil. de Engast. pp. 28, 29. 

> Tlpotpérovrec pev ext THY ei¢ Ocdv evoéBetav, arotparorTec 0 ard 
Tov Katagpovely Tod Veiov, Kai TaVTWY THY Tapa TOV bpVov Abyor mpaT- 
Touévwv. Origen. contra Cels. lib. 3, p. 142. 

© Tore roAwapev év Toi¢ mpd¢ TO Kowvov diaddyote dépEty Eic¢ péoor, 
67° evropotpev ovveTay akpaTov, droxpiTToper dt Kal TapacwTapev 








THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 173 


§ 11. As for the preacher himself, it was usually the 
bishop of the parish. So saith Justin Martyr, ‘“ the bishop 
preaches by way of instruction and exhortation, to the 
imitation of those excellent things which we read.’ Or 
else he desired a presbyter, or some other fit person, to 
preach in his room: without his consent it had been 
schism and violence in any person whatsoever to have 
usurped his chair; but, with his permission, any clergy- 
man or layman might preach in his pulpit. Now that 
clergymen preached, no one will question, though it will 
be doubted whether laymen did: but that they did so, ap- 
pears from a memorable history concerning Origen, who 
going from Alexandria to Palestine, by the desire of the 
bishops of that country, publicly preached in the church, 
and expounded the Holy Scriptures, although he was not 
yet in holy orders. At which action, when Demetrius, 
bishop of Alexandria, was offended, Alexander, bishop of 
Jerusalem, and Theoctistus, of Cesarea, wrote to him in 
defence of it as follows: ‘“‘ Whereas you write in your 
letter, that it was never before seen or done, that laymen 
should preach in the presence of bishops, therein you 
wander from the truth; for wheresoever any are found 
that are fit to profit the brethren, the holy bishops, of their 
own accord, ask them to preach unto the people. So 
Evelpis was desired by Neon, bishop of Laranda, and 
Paulinus by Celsus of [conium, and Theodorus by Atticus 
of Synnada, our most blessed brethren ; and it is credible 
that this is likewise done in other places, though we know 
it not.”» But yet though laymen preached, it was not 


ta Baditepa Tove ovvepyouévouc, Kal Seopévove Adywy TpoTLKd¢ Ove. 
palouévwv yada. Idem ibidem. p. 143. 

2'O mpoecac did Adye THv vovdeciav, Kal TPdKAHOLY TIE TOV KaA@v 
TOOTWY plunoews Toeitat. Apolog. 2, p. 98. 

b Tpocédyke dé Toic ypdupaaty, drt TodTO ovdéerOTE HKOVGEN OSE Viv 
yeyévytal, TO Tap6vtwr éxtoKdrav Aaikove outrety, oid Owe Tpopar- 


174 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


every one that did so, but only those that were émrjdevot 
mpoe Td ddereiv Tove adeAdode, “ fit to profit the brethren ;” and 
though they were never so fit, yet they did not irregularly 
or disorderly run about a preaching, or discharge that 
sacred office, “till they were desired by the bishop of a 
parish to do it,” kai xpooxahodvra: TH 2.00 Tpoooptheiv bro TGV 
dyiwv éioxérwv, but stayed for the permission and appro- 
bation of such a one; for without that their sermons and 
discourses would have been but so many acts of schism 
and faction. 


CHAPTER II. 


§ 1. After preaching, all the congregation rose up to joi in public 
prayers. § 2. They prayed toward the east. Their reasons for that 
custom. § 3. They lifted up their hands and eyes toward heaven. 
§ 4. Whether the minister that officiated wore a surplice, and therein 
of ministers’ habits. § 5. Whether they sung their prayers, and 
whether they used responsals. § 6. Of prescribed liturgies. The 
Lord’s prayer not always, but commonly used by them. § 7. To the 
Lord’s prayer they added other prayers of their own choice or inven- 
tion, proved so to have been. § 8. Whether their prayers were 
divided into several collects. 


§ 1. As soon as the sermon was ended, then all the 
congregation rose up to present their common and _ public 
prayers unto Almighty God, as Justin Martyr writes, that 
when the preacher had finished his discourse, “they all 


G¢ obK GAN dH Aéyov, 6xov yobv ebpicxovTat of exiTHdELoL TOC TO Ode- 
Aeiv rove ddeAgove, Kal Tapaxahodvtar TH Aa@ Tpocourdaciy bxd TOV 
e a > va r bd 4 ¥ e x 7 $i 
aylwy émloKoOTwVv, worep ev Aapdvdoig EveAric dxb Néwyvoc, Kat év 
Ixoviw ILavaivog id Kédoov, kai tv Suvddorg Oeddwpoe rd ’ATTLKOD 
TOV “akapiwy UdEAdG?Y, Eikd¢ O2 év GAROLE TémOLE TODTO yiveoSat, nude 
X\ . 
dé uy eidévar. Apud Euseb. lib. 6, cap. 19, p. 222. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. lve 


rose up, and offered their prayers unto God.”* Standing 
being the usual posture of praying, (at least the constant 
one on Sundays, on which day they esteemed it a sin to 
kneel,) whence the preacher frequently concluded his 
sermon with an exhortation to his auditors to stand up and 
pray to God, as we find it more than once in the conclu- 
sion of Origen’s sermons; as, “ Wherefore standing up, 
let us beg help from God, that we may be blessed in Jesus 
Christ, to whom be glory for ever and ever, Amen.”> And, 
“ Wherefore, rising up, let us pray to God that we may be 
made worthy of Jesus Christ, to whom be glory and do- 
minion for ever and ever, Amen.”* And again, ‘“ Stand- 
ing up, let us offer sacrifices to the Father through Christ, 
who is the propitiation for our sins, to whom be glory and 
dominion for ever and ever, Amen.”! 

§ 2. Accordingly the whole congregation stood up, and 
turned their faces toward the east, it being their custom 
and manner to pray toward that quarter, as Tertullian 
writes, “ We pray toward the east.”° Now the reasons 
that I meet with for this usage may be reduced to these 
three or four :— 

I. Out of respect and reverence to their Lord and Mas- 
ter, Jesus Christ, they prayed toward the east, because 
the East is a title given to Christ in the Old Testament ; 


a”Ereita dvicdueda Kolwy mavTEeC, Kal evyacg TeuTouev. Apolog. 
2, p- 98. 

b Ald dvacavTec THY ard Oeod Bonterav altiowper, iva év Xpico 
Inood paxapioSipuev, @ 7 00Sa ei¢ Tog aidvag THY aiovwr, ’AuHv. 
Homil. 19 in Jerem. vol. 1, p. 198. 

© Quapropter consurgentes deprecemur Dominum, ut digni efficiamur 
——Christo Jesu, cui est gloria et imperium in secula seculorum. 
Amen. Homil. 2 in Cantic. 

4 Surgentes per Christum sacrificia Patri offeramus, ipse enim propi- 
tiatio est pro peccatis nostris, cui est gloria et imperium in secula sx- 
culorum. In Isaiam, Homil. 1. 

© Nos ad Orientis regionem precari. Apolog. cap. 16, p. 688. 


176 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


for that place in Zech. vi, 12, “ Behold the man whose name 
is The Branch,” they translated according to the Septuagint, 
‘* Behold the man whose name is The East,”* which mis- 
apprehension of the word branch arose from the different 
significations or applications of the Greek word by which 
the Septuagint expressed it. In the original Hebrew the 
word is max, which signifies an arising or sprouting out, 
as doth a branch from a root. The word by which they 
rendered it in Greek is, dvato27, which, in a large sense, 
comprehends all sorts of arising and springing out; but, 
strictly and generally, is applied to the arising and first ap- 
pearing of the sun, and, by a metonymy, is appropriated to 
the east, because the sun arises in that quarter. The fa- 
thers, therefore, not knowing the original, and finding Christ 
to be called in their ordinary version dvaroAy, presently 
concluded that, according to the usual signification of the 
word, he was there termed by the prophet, “ The East,” 
whom they conceived to be so called, because “ he was 
to arise like a star.”® And, “as the sun that ariseth in 
the east penetrates through the world with its warm and 
illuminating rays, so Christ, the Sun of righteousness, 
would arise with more warmth of light, and pierce farther 
than the material sun, even into the depths of men’s hearts 
and minds.”* Hence the east is called by Tertullian, “ A 
type of Christ ;”4 and for this reason we may very well 
suppose, that they prayed toward the east, as well as built 
their churches toward it; which that they did, we shall 
show in its proper place. 

a Kai aAAn 0& ypady onotv idov avnp avato2AH bvoua aitd. Justin. 
Martyr. Dialog. cum Tryphon. p. 334. 

b "Ort We Gcpoy EWweAAev dvatéAAev. Idem. ibid. p 334. 

© Ilupwdécepog yap avtov 6 Tig GAnVeiac Kat codiag A6yoc, Kai gw- 
TewoTEpog UaAAov Tév Hiiov duvdueav éct, Kal TA PASH THe Kapdiag 
kal Tod vod eiodivur, bVev Kai 6 Adyoc Edn Brep Tov HALovy avaTersi 
70 Ovowa avTod: Kai TdALY, dvaToAy bvoua aitod. Idem. ibid. p. 350. 

4 Orientem Christi figuram. Advers. Valentin. p. 284. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 177 


II. Another reason might be with respect to the simili- 
tude of the rising of the sun, with our spiritual arising out of 
the darkness of sin and corruption, which I find thus ex- 
pressed by Clemens Alexandrinus: “ Let prayers be made 
toward the east, because the east is the representation of 
our spiritual nativity. As from thence light first arose, 
shining out of darkness, so, according to that rising of the 
sun, the day of true knowledge arose on those who lay 
buried in ignorance; whence the ancient temples looked 
toward the west, that so they who stood against the ima- 
ges therein might be forced to look toward the east.”# 

III. Origen advises to pray toward the eastern climate, 
to denote our diligence in the service of God, in being 
more forward to arise and set about it, than the sun is to 
run his daily course, for which he produces an apocryphal 
text, Wisdom xvi, 28, “ That it might be known that we 
must prevent the sun to give thee thanks, and at the day- 
spring pray unto thee.» 

IV. Another reason for their praying toward the east, 
was their opinion of the excellency of this quarter above 
others ; which argument Origen thus delivers, as well as 
I can translate it: ‘‘ Whereas there are four climates, the 
north and south, the west and the east—who will not ac- 
knowledge that we ought to pray looking toward the east, 
symbolically representing thereby our souls beholding the 
arising of the true Light? If a man, which way soever 
the doors of his house are placed, would rather make his 

a’Eni 62 yevedAiov nuépac eixov 9 dvatoay, Kaxeidev 70 dd¢ abse- 
Tat &k oKdrove Adupav TO MpOTOV, GAA Kal Toi¢ év dyvoia Kahtvdov- 
pévolg avétethe yvooewc GAndeiac juépa Kata Adyov Tod HAiov mpo¢g 
THY EwSivAY avaToAny ai ebyai: bSEv Kai Ta TaAaiTaTa TOV LepGv TpPOE 
Ovolv éBAEerev, iva ol GxavTec Tp6cwTov TOV GyaAudtor icduEevor TPOG 
avatoAny tpéreotat diddokwvtat. Stromat. lib. 7. p. 520. 

b Tlept dé KAiwarog év TH codia LoAoudvtos, bTw¢ yvwcov H OTL det 
oddvew Tov hAtov én’ ebyapiciag cov, Kal TEpl avaToAye dwTd¢ év- 
tuyxavew oot. De Oratione, § 20, p. 127. 


8* 


178 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


prayers toward the windows, saying, that the sight of the 
sky hath something more peculiar in it to stir up his affec- 
tion than his looking against a wall; or, if it so happen 
that the windows of his house do not look toward the east, 
that happened from the arbitrary structure of the builder, 
but not from nature, which prefers the east before the 
other quarters ; and nature is to be preferred before that 
building ; or, if any one will pray in the open field, will 
he not pray rather toward the east than toward the west ? 
And if in these things the east is preferred before the 
west, why is it not so also in every thing besides ?”« 

For these four reasons now, but principally I suppose 
for the first, they usually prayed toward the east; inas- 
much that for their worshipping toward this quarter, and 
for their religious observation of the Lord’s day, or Sun- 
day, so called because dedicated to the sun, they “ were 
accused by the heathen of reverencing and adoring the 
sun.”> 

§ 3. The congregation being thus turned toward the 
east, they put themselves into a posture of prayer, stretch- 


a Tecodpur O& dbvTwv KAydtwv, TodTE Tpb¢ UpKTOY Kal pweohuBpLav, 
Kal TovTE Tpd¢ Oba Kat avaToARy, Tic OVK av avTOGEV Ouohoynoal Ta 
mpoc avatorny évepyOc gudaivery To Osiv éxet vetovtac cvuBodtKdc, O¢ 
THe WexHe éevopdonc TH TOD GAndiwod dwtb¢ avaToAH, ToLteioSar TUG 
ebyac; éav d& Tic drovdAToTe TOV Yvpdv Tov oikov vevovowr, BavAe- 
Tal, UGAAOV KaTa TO avEewyoe THe oiKiag Tpoogépelry Tag evTevserc, Aé- 
yov THv ei¢ TOV oipavoy dy Eyelv TL UGAAOY TpocKahovuévwr Ed’ Eav- 
TO The ext Tov Teiyov ETUAePEews, Ei THYOLEY pH OLavEwyOTa TOU oiKOV 
Ta Tpo¢ avaToAac, AeKTéov Tpde adTov bre Véoet THY oiKOdopNLGTwY 
ivSporwr kata Ta0e TA KAipata, ) Tade OLavotyouévwr, dboeL OE THE 
avatoaje TOV Aoimev TpoKkeKpluévyne KAYLaTWY, TO dvoEL TOU SéoEL TpO- 
taxréov: GAAG Kal 6 év Tedin, evSaoat BovAduevoc, Ti udAAoY KaTa 
Tovtoyv } éni dbow mpocetbseTat, el O& éxei mpoKpitéov Tag avaToAdg 
kata TO evAoyor, OLdte TodTO ov TavTayod zointéov; De Oratione, 
§ 21, pp. 133, 134. 

b Inde suspicio, quod innotuerit nos ad orientis regionem precari. 
Tertul. Apolog. cap. 16, p. 688. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 179 


ing out their hands and lifting up their eyes toward heaven, 
as Clemens Alexandrinus writes: “ We lift up our head, 
and stretch out our hands toward heaven.”* And so Ter- 
tullian: ‘“ We pray, looking up to heaven with expanded 
hands ;”® by this devout posture imitating “ the lifting up 
of their hearts to God in the heavens.”* Wherefore, as 
now to quicken the people’s devotion, the minister, before 
prayer, excites them thereunto by saying, “ Let us pray ;” 
so in the African churches, in Cyprian’s days, the minis- 
ter “ prefaced his prayer by saying to the people, ‘ Lift up 
your hearts :’ to which the people, to testify their consent, 
answered, ‘ We lift them up unto the Lord.’ 4 

§4. After this the minister began to pray: but before 
we handle his prayer, it may not be unnecessary to con- 
sider in what habit he officiated, whether in a surplice or 
no. His usual garb was a pallium, which is the same 
with what we call a cloak.e This, as being the most 
simple and plain garment, was commonly worn by the 
Christians. The usual garb throughout the whole Roman 
empire was the toga, which was more gay and splendid 
than the pallium; wherefore those who came over from 
paganism to Christianity, for the indication of their hu- 
mility and contempt of the world, quitted the toga, as too 
pompous and mundane, and assumed the pallium or cloak, 


4 TIpocavatetvouev Tv Keparyy, Kal TAC YElpag El¢ OVpavoY aipouer. 
Stromat. lib. 7, p. 519. 

> Tlluc suspicientes Christian! manibus expansis. Apolog. cap. 30, 
p. 703. 

© Olovel Tov elxdva Tov TpEeTévTwov idiwudtwv, &c. Origen. de 
Orat. § 20, p. 128. 

4 Sacerdos ante orationem prefatione premissa parat fratrum mentes 
dicendo, Sursum corda; et respondet plebs, Habemus ad Dominum. 
Cyprian. de Orat. Dominic. § 22, p. 316. 

e Pallio nihil expeditius, quippe tota molitio ejus operire est so- 
lutim, id est, uno circumjectu ita omnia hominis simul contegit. 


Tertul. de Pallio. p. 490. 








180 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


as more grave and modest; from which change of apparel, 
and renouncing of a sumptuous habit, to embrace a poor 
and mean one, the heathens derided and exposed the 
Christians, even to a proverb, a toga ad pallium; which 
sarcastic language engaged Tertullian to write a little 
tract in defence of the cloak, which is still extant in his 
writings under the title of ‘‘ De Pallio.” 

But Salmasius and Dr. Cave* think this severe habit 
was not worn by all Christians, but only by those of them 
that led a more austere and mortified life; such as the 
clergy and some self-denying personages amongst the 
laity ; and that, therefore, it is called by Tertullian in the 
forementioned tract, ‘“ sacerdotis habitus,” or priest’s ap- 
parel, as it is in all ancient manuscripts, and in the first 
edition of ‘“ Beatus Rhenanus,” and not “ sacer habitus,” 
the holy apparel, as it is in the later editions. But whe- 
ther it were so or no, I shall not here debate: this is suf- 
ficient for my purpose, that the clergy usually wore a 
cloak. But now that in times of public prayer they should 
put a surplice, or any other kind of linen garment, over 
their cloaks, neither Tertullian, nor any other, speak the 
least syllable of it. Instead of putting another vestment 
on their gown or cloak, Tertullian mentions some in his 
days, who at prayers would throw off their gown or cloak, 
which he condemns as a superstitious affectation, and a 
heathenish custom. ‘ So,” saith he, “ the heathens pray 
to their gods, which, if it ought to have been done, would 
have been enjoined by the apostles, who have given direc- 
tions concerning the manner of prayers: unless, some 
think, that when Paul had put off his cloak at prayer, he 
forgot it, and left it behind him at Carpus’s.’® 

§ 5. But, quitting the habit of him that officiated, let us 

a Primitive Christianity. Part 2, cap. 3, p. 47. 

> Quorundam positis penulis orationem facere: sic enim adeunt ad 
idola nationes: quod utique si fieri oporteret, apostoli qui de habitu 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 181 


return to his prayer, which he pronounced “ with a modest 
and bashful voice,”* that being most proper for those who 
came to acknowledge the multitude and heinousness of 
their sins, and to beg God’s pardon and grace, which is 
the end and design of prayer. Musical singing is best 
agreeable to the praising and adoring of God; “ but our 
petitions to God ought to be sent up with most fervent 
prayers, with tears, and cries, and groans.”® 

Doubtless the minister so prayed as did most affect the 
people, whose mouth he was to God; for they did not 
vocally join with him in the prayers, but only testified 
their assent to what the minister prayed, by saying, Amen, 
or, So be at. Thus in the prayer at the celebration of the 
Lord’s supper, the president of the assembly only prayed, 
and the people concurred with the amen. So writes Jus- 
tin Martyr :—‘ The bishop makes a long prayer over the 
elements, and when he ends, all the people present give 
their approbation by saying, Amen.”* And, “* When the 
elements are blessed by the minister’s prayer, and the 
people have approved it by saying, Amen, then they are 
distributed.”4 And, “ ‘The bishop, according to his ability, 
prays over the elements, and the people give their accla- 
mations, saying, Amen.”® So that scrupulous person men- 
tioned by Dionysius Alexandrinus, in his epistle to Xys- 


orandi docent, comprehendissent, nisi si qui putant Paulum penulam su- 
am in oratione penes Carpum reliquisse. De Oratione, p. 659. 

4 Modestis precibus orare. Cyprian de Orat. Dominic. § 2, p. 309. 

> Enixis precibus, lacrymis ingemiscamus, preces, gemitus, lachry- 
mez. Cyprian. Epist. 8. p. 23. 

© Tap’ abrod éxi road roveitat, ob cvvreAhoartog Tac ebydc¢ Kal THY 
evyapiciav, mac 6 Tapwv Aadg éErevonuet Aéywv, ’Aunv. Apolog. 2, 
p- 97. 

4 Hivapicnoavtoc dé TOU mMpoEsGToe Kai ErevonufnoavtToe Tavto¢ TOD 
Aaot. Ibid. p.97. 

© Evyac¢ duoiws Kai etyapisiag b60n Obvamic abTd avaréurrer, Kal 6 
Aadc exevonuct Aéywv 70, ’Aunv. Ibid. p. 98. 


182 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


tus, is said “to have frequently heard the eucharistical 
prayer, and with the rest of the congregation to have an- 
swered, Amen.”* Henricus Valesius, in his notes on this 
place; as, likewise, Dr. Hammond, in his annotations on 
1 Cor. xiv, thinks that St. Paul had reference to this cus- 
tom of the people saying Amen at the conclusion of the 
eucharistical prayer in 1 Cor. xiv, 16, “ Else, when thou 
shalt bless with the spirit, how shall he that occupieth 
the room of the unlearned say Amen at thy giving of thanks, 
seeing he understandeth not what thou sayest?” In which 
place St. Paul condemns, as absurd and senseless, the 
practice of some men, who would consecrate the sacrament 
in Hebrew or Syriac before Greeks, who, understanding 
not those tongues, could not bear their share in the eucha- 
ristical prayer, which consisted not in antiphonal or respon- 
sory replies to the minister, but only in saying Amen, or, 
So be it, to what he had prayed. 

It is true, indeed, that these citations are spoken in par- 
ticular of the prayer before the Lord’s supper; but yet, 
they may be also applied to their prayer after sermon, 
since we have no reason to imagine, that in the one they 
should use responsals, and in the other none. But that in 
all their prayers the priest only prayed, seems to be appa- 
rent, for that it was one part of his office to pray for the 
people. ‘“ The priests,” says Cyprian, “ pray for the safety 
of the Lord’s people.”® And ‘the priests who have sa- 
crificed to idols, cannot assume to themselves the priest- 
hood, or make any prayer in God’s sight for the brethren.’”’« 


aEiyapiciag yap éraxotoavta, kai ouvveniodeySduevor, Td Ayr. 
Apud Euseb. lib. 7, cap. 9, p. 255. 

> In precibus quas faciunt pro plebis Dominice incolumitate. Epist. 
68, § 2, p. 201. 

© Qui idolis sacrificando sacrilega sacrificia fecerunt, sacerdotium Dei 
sibi vindicare non possunt, nec ullam in conspectu ejus precem pro fra- 
tribus facere. Epist. 64, § 2, p. 190. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 183 


“ Therefore those ought to be chosen into the priesthood 
whom God will hear.”* It was the priest that solely 
pronounced the public prayers, without the voices of the 
people ; and, indeed, it was impossible for the people to 
respond, since they had no fixed public form of prayer, 
except the Lord’s prayer; which Lord’s prayer they fre- 
quently, though not always, repeated. And then, as to 
their other prayers, every bishop or minister of a parish 
was left to his own liberty and ability therein. 

§ 6. As for the use of the Lord’s prayer, it must first be 
observed, that the constant repeating of it with other 
prayers was not esteemed necessary, but frequently it was 
omitted. Thus, in the heavenly prayer of Polycarpus at 
the stake, the Lord’s prayer is neither at the beginning 
nor ending. The conclusion of it is, “ Lord, I will praise 
thee, I will bless thee, I will magnify thee through the 
eternal High Priest, Christ Jesus, thy beloved Son, by 
whom, to thee, with him, and the Holy Ghost, be glory 
now and for evermore, Amen.” So Clemens Alexan- 
drinus concludes his last book of Pedagogy with a prayer 
which neither ends nor begins with the Lord’s prayer ; 
and Origen, prescribing a method of prayer, speaks not a 
word of the Lord’s prayer, but advises both to begin and 
end with doxology, or a giving praise to God. In this 
respect they regarded the Lord’s prayer as given by Christ 
for a pattern of all other prayers, according to which they 
were to be made; whence Cyprian calls this prayer, “ the 
law or rule of praying;’* “so that to pray otherwise than 

4 Oportet eos ad sacerdotium deligi, quos 4 Deo constet audiri. 
Epist. 68, §3, p. 201. 

b 32 aivd, of eiAoyd, o& dokdow, dia Tod aiwviov apylepéws "Incod 
Xpicod rob dyarnrod cod rardde, dv od ool ody adit év rvEebpmaTL dyiw 
66a, Kat viv, Kai sig TodE péAAOVTAc aidvac, Aun. Apud Euseb. lib. 
4, cap. 15, p. 133. 

© De Oratione, § 22, pp. 134, 135. 

4QOrandi legem. De Unit. Ecclesie.§ 11, p. 299. 


184 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


that prayer directed was ignorance and impiety.”* ‘“ Where- 
fore,” says Cyprian, “let every one pray to God, not only 
for himself, but for all the brethren, as the Lord hath taught 
us to pray for all.”» And so writes Clemens Alexandri- 
nus, “‘ that a good man never remembers the affronts that 
are offered him, but always forgets them; wherefore he 
justly prays, saying, ‘ Forgive us as we forgive others ;’”¢ 
that is, he prays according to the sense of the fifth peti- 
tion ; for it is the sense, not the very words of that petition, 
that he here recites. 

But though the repetition of the Lord’s prayer was not 
necessary, yet it was usual; whence saith Origen, “Christ 
gave us a prayer with which he commanded us to pray 
unto the Father.”4 And Tertullian writes, ‘‘ That our 
Lord Jesus Christ gave to his disciples a new form of 
prayer.”® Whence he calls the Lord’s prayer, “ the law- 
ful prayer.”’ And Cyprian yet more fully writes, that 
“Christ hath given us a form of prayer; he hath admon- 
ished and instructed what we should pray for. He that 
made us live, hath taught us to pray; that whilst we offer 
unto the Father the prayer which the Son taught, we may 
be the more easily heard. For what prayer can be more 
spiritual than that which was given us by Christ, who 
gave us also the Holy Spirit? And what prayer can be 
more prevalent with God than that of his Son, who is the 
truth, proceeding out of his mouth? So that to pray 


4 Ut aliter orare quam docuit, non ignorantia sola sit, sed et culpa 
De Orat. Dominic. § 1, p. 309. 

> Unusquisque oret Deum non pro se tantum, sed pro omnibus fratri- 
bus, sicut Dominus orare nos docuit. Epist. 8, § 6, p. 24. 

© OidéroTe THY Eig aVTOY duapTHodyTwY wéuvyTat, GAAG adinot, dd 
Kai Orkaiwe ebyeTat, ade juiv, Aéywv, Kal yap Hueic ddiewev. Strom. 
lib. 7, p. 537. 

4 Qua Patrem nos jussit orare. In Isaiam, Homil. 1. 

¢ Novam orationis formam determinavit. De Oratione, p. 657. 

' Legitima Oratio. De fuga in Persecut. p. 436. 





THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 185 


otherwise than he hath taught, is both ignorance and im- 
piety. Let us pray, therefore, dearly beloved brethren, as 
God our Master hath taught us. It is a friendly and fa- 
miliar prayer to ask God with his own, and to present the 
prayer of Christ to his ears; the Father will acknowledge 
his Son’s words. When we pray, let him that dwells in 
the heart be in the voice; and since we have him an 
advocate with the Father for our sins, when we beg par- 
don for our sins let us use the words of our Advocate. 
And since he says, that whatsoever we shall ask of the 
Father in his name, he will give it us; how much more 
efficaciously shall we prevail for what we beg in Christ’s 
name, if we ask it in his prayer?”* To this prayer it is 
that Tertullian gives this encomium:—“In the compen- 
dium of a few words, how many declarations of prophets, 
evangelists, and apostles; how many speeches, parables, 
examples, and precepts, are contained! How many duties 
toward God! Honour to God in the preface, faith in the 
first petition, hope in the second, resignation in the third, 
petition for life in the fourth, confession of sins in the fifth, 
watchfulness against temptation in the sixth. What 


4 Orandi ipse formam dedit, ipse quid precaremur monuit et Instruxit : 
qui fecit vivere, docuit et orare——ut dum prece et oratione quam filius 
docuit, apud patrem loquimur, facilius audiamur Que enim potest 
esse magis spiritualis oratio, quam que veré a Christo nobis data est, a 
quo nobis et Spiritus Sanctus missus est? Que veré magis apud Pa- 
trem precatio, quam que 4 filio, qui est veritas, de ejus ore prolata est ? 
Ut aliter orare quam docuit, non ignorantia sola sit, sed et culpa 
Oremus itaque fratres dilectissimi, sicut Magister Deus docuit. Amica 
et familiaris oratio est Deum de suo rogare, ad aures ejus ascendere 
Christi orationem, agnoscat Pater Fili sui verba: cum precem facimus, 
qui habitat intus in pectore, ipse sit et m voce: et cum ipsum habeamus 
apud Patrem Advocatum pro peccatis nostris, quando peccatores pro 
delictis nostris petimus, Advocati nostri verba premamus. Nam cum 
dicat, quia quodcunque petierimus 4 Patre in nomine ejus, dabit nobis: 
quanto efficacius impetramus quod petimus in Christi nomine, si petamus 
ipsius oratione? De Orat. Dominic. § 1, 2, p. 309. 








186 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


wonder! God alone could teach how he would be prayed 
to.” 

§ 7. But though they frequently used the Lord’s prayer, 
yet they did not only use that, but others also; for imme- 
diately to the foregoing encomium of the Lord’s prayer, 
Tertullian adjoins, ‘‘ That we may add thereunto, and offer 
up prayers unto God according to the variety of our cir- 
cumstances and condition.”® [rom which passage of the 
said father, we may guess their usual method of prayer 
was, first to begin with the Lord’s prayer, as the ground 
and foundation of all others; and then, according to their 
circumstances and conditions, to offer up their own prayers 
and requests. Now that this conjecture may appear to 
have some foundation, it will be necessary to translate at 
large this place of Tertullian, and to show the introduction 
or occasion of it, which was this:—After this father had, 
as before, commented on, summed up, and magnified the 
Lord’s prayer, he concludes, that nevertheless “we may 
add thereunto; for since the Lord, the observer of all hu- 
man necessities, has, in another place, after he had de- 
livered this prayer, said, ‘ Ask, and ye shall receive ;’ and 
every one has particular circumstances to beg for; there- 
fore, having premised the lawful and ordinary prayer, there 
is place for accidental requests, and a liberty of offer- 
ing up other petitions, so as they do agree with the pre- 
cepts. As far as we are from the precepts, so far are 
we from God’s ears; the remembrance of the precepts 


4 Compendiis paucorum verborum, quot attinguntur cdicta propheta- 
rum, evangeliorum, apostolorum, sermones Domini, parabole, exempla, 
precepta! Quotsimulexpunguntur officia Dei, honor in patre ; fides, 
testimonium in nomine, oblatio obsequii in voluntate, commemoratio spei 
in regno, petitio vite in pane, exomologesis debitorum in deprecatione, 
sollicitudo tentationum in postulatione tutele! Quid mirum! Deus 
solus docere potuit, ut se vellet orari. De Orat. p. 659. 

> Posse nos super adjicere et sunt que petantur pro circumstan- 
tid cujusque. De Oratione, p. 659. 





—— rr ee 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 187 


makes way for our prayers to heaven, of which it is the 
chief.” 

Now these other prayers, which made up a great part 
of divine service, were not stinted and imposed forms, but 
the words and expressions of them were left to the pru- 
dence, choice, and judgment of every particular bishop er 
minister. 

I do not here say that a bishop or minister used no arbi- 
trary form of prayer; all that I say is, that there was none 
imposed. Neither dol say, that having no imposed form, 
they unpremeditatedly, immethodically, or confusedly, 
vented their petitions and requests; for, without doubt, 
they observed a method in their prayers ; but this is what 
I say, that the words or expressions of their prayers were 
not imposed or prescribed; but every one that officiated 
delivered himself in such terms as best pleased him, and 
varied his petitions according to the present circumstances 
and emergencies; or, if it be more intelligible, that the 
primitive Christians had no stinted liturgies, or imposed 
forms of prayer. 

Now this being a negative in matter of fact, the bare 
assertion of it is a suflicient proof, except its affirmative 
can be evinced. Suppose it was disputed whether ever 
Saint Paul wrote an epistle to the church of Rome, the 
bare negation thereof would be proof enough that he did 
not, except it could be clearly evinced on the contrary that 
he did. So, unless it can be proved that the ancients had 


a Posse nos super adjicere. Quoniam tamien Dominus, prospector hu- 
manarum necessitatum, seorsim post traditam orandi disciplinam, peti- 
te, inquit, et accipietis, et sunt que petantur, pro circumstantia cujus- 
que, premissa legitima et ordinarid oratione quasi fundamento, acciden- 
tium jus est desideriorum, jus est superstruendi extrinsecus petitiones 
cum memoria tamen preceptorum: ne quantum a preceptis, tantum ab 
auribus Dei longé simus. Memoria preceptorum viam orationibus 
sternit ad celum, quorum precipuum est. De Oratione, p. 659. 


188 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


fixed liturgies and prayer-books, we may very rationally 
conclude in the negative, that they had none at all. 

Now, as to these prescribed forms, there is not the least 
mention of them in any of the primitive writings, nor the least 
word or syllable tending thereunto, that I can find; which 
is a most unaccountable silence, if ever such there were, 
but rather some expressions intimating the contrary; as 
that famous controverted place of Justin Martyr; who, 
describing the manner of the prayer before the celebration 
of the Lord’s supper, says, that the bishop sent up prayers 
and praises to God “ with his utmost ability,”* 607 dévayie, 
that is, that he prayed with the best of his abilities, inven- 
tion, expression, judgement, andthe like. [am not ignorant 
that there is another sense given of 607 dévauic, or, “ ac- 
cording to his ability.” But I must needs say, that I 
generally, if not always, found this phrase to include per- 
sonal abilities. ‘Thus, as to the explanation of Scripture, 
Origen writes, that he would expound it, “according to 
his ability,” 607 dévayic,» and that he would comment on 
that parable of the blind man that was healed near Jericho, 
mentioned in Luke xviii, 35, «ata rd dévarov,s and so on 
the parable concerning the husbandman, xara dévauy 54 and 
on the marriage of the king’s son, xara ryv sapotcay déva- 
puv;° and that he would search out the sense of the gos- 
pel of St. John, xara déivauiv.£ Now what doth Origen 
intend by his searching out the sense, and expounding the 
meaning of the Scriptures to the utmost of his power and 
ability? Is it a bare reading and transcribing of other 
men’s works, or an employment of his own abilities and 
studies to find out the sense and meaning of them? Cer- 
tainly every one will think the latter to be most probable. 

So as to the argumentative defence of the truth, Origen 


4 Apolog. 2, p. 98. > Com. in Matth. tom. 17, p. 487, vol. 1. 
© Com. in Matth. tom. 16, p. 429, vol. 1. 4 Ibid. tom. 17, p. 463. 
© Ibid. tom. 17, p. 474. f Com. in Johan. tom. 1, p. 5, vol. 2. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 189 


promises that he would answer the calumnies of Celsus 
“ according to his power,” xara tiv rapotcay diva 32 and 
that he would defend and confirm his arguments against 
Celsus “ according to his power,” 607 dévayic ;» and demon- 
strate the reasonableness of the Christian religion, “ ac- 
cording to his power,” 607 dévayic ;* and dispute against 
Celsus “ according to his power,” 607 divayic.4 Now whe- 
ther Origen’s defending the truth, and disputing against 
Celsus, according to his utmost ability and power, con- 
sisted in reading, or in a bare transcribing out of a book 
the written arguments of other men, or in an employment 
of his own abilities, inventions, and expressions, is no 
difficult matter to determine. 

I have not found one place wherein this phrase of 607 
dévayec doth not comprehend personal abilities; and seve- 
ral scores more might I cite where it is so to be under- 
stood, which I shall omit, and mention only one more, 
spoken by Origen with respect to the duty of prayer, 
where it must of necessity imply personal abilities, and 
that is in his book De Oratione,* where he prescribes the 
methods and parts of prayer, the first whereof was doxol- 
ogy; wherein, says he, he that prays must bless God 
‘“‘ according to his power,” 
must signify the performer’s abilities of judgment and ex- 
pression, because it is not spoken of prescribed words, 
but of a prescribed method of prayer; as if any one should 
desire me to inform him how or in what method he must 
pray ; I tell him, as Origen doth in this place, that first he 
must begin with an invocation of God by his titles and 
attributes ; then he must proceed to praise God for his 
mercies and benefits, confessing withal his ingratitude 
and unfruitfulness : then beg pardon for past sins, strength 
against future, and conclude all with praising God through 


a Contra Celsum, lib. 1, p. 2. b Tbid. lib. 1, p. 36. 
c Ibid. lib. 6, p. 265. 4 Ibid. lib. 7, p. 332. © § 22, p. 134. 


cata dbvauv, where kata dvvapev 


190 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


Christ, and that he must do all this according to the utmost 
of his ability. What could any one imagine that I should 
intend by this advice, of following this method to the ut- 
most of his power, but by the exerting of his own abilities, 
understanding, memory, invention, expression, and the 
like, since I direct him not to any prescribed words, but 
only to the observation of those general heads and parts 
of prayer ? 

So that the minister’s praying 607 dévaytc, or “ according 
to the utmost of his ability,” imports the exerting his gifts 
and parts in suitable manner and apt expressions; and 
that the primitive prayers were so, appears yet farther 
from a passage in Origen, who thus explains that verse in 
Matthew vi, “ But, when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, 
as the heathen do.” ‘“ But, when we pray, let us not bat- 
tologize,” that is, use not vain repetitions, ‘“ but theolo- 
gize. But we battologize when we do not strictly observe 
ourselves, or the words of prayer which we express when 
we utter those things which are filthy either to do, speak, 
or think ; which are vile, worthily reproveable, and alien- 
ated from the purity of the Lord.”* Surely this caution 
had been needless of strictly observing the words that they 
uttered ; and this fear had been groundless of expressing 
themselves undecently or sinfully, if they had had a prayer- 
book to recur to; but that they had no such prayer-book 
appears yet more evidently from Tertullian, who, describ- 
ing their public prayers, says that ‘‘ looking up to heaven, 
they spread abroad their hands, because innocent; un- 
covered their heads, because not ashamed; and without a 


a"AAAG Tpocevyopuevol, wy BatToAcyjowmer, GAAa Seohoyfowper: 
Barrodoyotper 0& OTL U7 WoLooKoTObYTES EavTOvE } TALE dvaTEUTOMEY- 
ove Tig EvxXIG Adyoug Aéyouev Ta SiedTapuéva Epya, 7) Adyove, 7 Vvo;- 
pata tarewva Tvyxyadvorvta Kai éridnnra, Tie agSapoiac GAA6TpLA TOD 
Kvpiov. De Oratione, § 10, p. 63. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 191 


monitor, because they prayed from the heart.”* Now 
what is to be understood by praying from the heart will 
best appear from inquiring into what is opposed to it, viz., 
the praying by a monitor. Now the praying by a monitor, 
as is acknowledged by all, was praying by a book. But 
thus, Tertullian affirms, the primitive Christians prayed 
not. ‘* We do not pray,” saith he, “ with a monitor, read- 
ing our prayers out of a book; no, but on the contrary, we 
pray, de pectore, from the heart, our own heart and soul 
dictating to us what is most proper and suitable to be 
asked, having no need of any other monitor besides.” 
Hence their prayers were suited to their emergencies 
and present circumstances, as Tertullian writes, that 
“having premised the Lord’s prayer, we may offer up ac- 
cidental requests and petitions,”® of which occasional 
requests we find some instances, as in the sixteenth epis- 
tle of Cyprian, where that father assures Moses and Max- 
imus, two Roman confessors, “ that he remembered them 
in his public prayers with his congregation.”* And in 
another epistle, where he congratulates Pope Lucius upon 
his return from banishment, he assures him, “that he did 
not cease in his public prayers to bless God for so great 
a mercy, and to pray him that was perfect to keep and 
perfect in him the glorious crown of his confession.”¢ And 


4 Tlluc suspicientes Christiani manibus expansis, quia innocuis, ce- 
pite nudo, quia non erubescimus, denique sine monitore, quia de pecto- 
reoramus. Apolog. cap. 30, p. 703. 

> Premissa legitima et ordinaria oratione, accidentium jus est desi- 
deriorum. De Orat. p. 659. 

© Et quando in sacrificiis precem cum plurimis facimus. Epist. 16. 
§ 1, p. 44. 

¢ Hic quoque in sacrificiis atque in orationibus nostris non cessantes 
Deo gratias agere, et orare pariter, ac petere, ut qui perfectus est 
atque perficiens, custodiat et perficiat in vobis confessionis vestre glo- 
riosam coronam. Epist. 58, § 2, p. 163. 





192 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


so when the church of Carthage sent a sum of money to 
the bishops of Numidia for the redemption of some Chris- 
tian captives, they desired those bishops ‘to remember 
them in their public prayers.”* So that their prayers 
could not be stinted, in invariable forms, because they 
could add new petitions, as their occasions and circum- 
stances did require. 

Firmilian reports of an exorcist woman that, being acted 
by the devil, she did wondrous feats, taking upon her to 
perform ecclesiastical administrations, as to baptize and 
celebrate the eucharist, the elements whereof she conse- 
crated, ‘‘ with an invocation not to be despised,”® that is, 
as seems to be most agreeable unto the place, and to the 
bon dévaue of Justin Martyr. The matter, invention, and 
expression of that prayer wherewith she consecrated the 
elements, was not mean or contemptible, but indifferently 
well performed. So that it seems evident, that though 
the method of their prayers might, in the main, be the 
same, yet every one was left to follow his own fancy and 
expression therein. 

But that I may hasten to the conclusion of this section, 
it is very unlikely that they were obliged to prescribed 
forms ; because they never read a syllable of their prayers 
out of any book whatsoever, which is evident from their 
posture of prayer, which was twofold, either with their 
hands and eyes lifted up to heaven, or with their eyes 
shut. That they prayed with their eyes and hands lifted 
up to heaven has been already shown in the third section 
of this chapter, to which I shall only add this farther ob- 


4 In mentem habeatis in orationibus vestris, et eis vicem boni operis 
in sacrificiis et precibus representetis. Epist. 60, § 4, p. 167. 

> Invocatione non contemptibili. Apud Cyprian. Epist. 75, § 10, 
p- 238. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 193 


servation, that “they stretched out their hands in the 
figure of a cross.”* 

That they also prayed with their eyes shut, is evident 
from Origen, who, having explained what is meant by that 
injunction of our Saviour in Matthew vi, 5, “ And when 
thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for 
they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the 
corners of the streets that they may be seen of men. 
Verily I say unto you, They have their reward,” thus ex- 
plains the following verse: ‘“ But thou, when thou prayest, 
enter thou into thy closet, and when thou hast shut to thy 
door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Fa- 
ther, which seeth in secret, shall reward thee openly.” 
“ But he that is no hypocrite enters into the closet of his 
heart, to the riches that are treasured up there, and shut- 
ting himself in amongst those treasures of wisdom and 
knowledge, and not fixing his eyes on external objects, as 
looking after any thing without, and closing every gate 
of the senses lest he should be drawn aside by them, and 
their species or fancies should creep into his mind, he 
prays to the Father, who never flies from or leaves such a 
one, but, together with the Son, dwells in him.” So the 
same father writes, that a true Christian prays in every 
place, “ closing the eyes of his senses, but erecting those 


4 Expandimus manus et dominica passione modulantes et orantes con- 
fitemur Christo. Tertul. de Orat. p. 659. 

>*O dé un drroKpiTHe eloépyetat cic TO EavTOdD Tapecov éri TOU évamoTe- 
Syoavptouévov TAovTOV, TOV THe codiag Kai yvdcewa¢ Syoavpov éavTo 
arokheicac, Kat undayas &w vebwv, py 0& wept Ta &Ew KEYNVOC, Tacav 
te THY Sbpav Tév aiodyrnpiwv aroKAeicac, iva py tAKeTae Td TOY 
aicSjoewy und? éxeivar ) davtacia TH Vv abrod éxetoxpivytat, Bpoo- 
evynTae TH TL ToOLoOdTOY KpuTTOV pH debyovTL, pnd? &yxaTadsirovTt 
Ilatpi, GAM év abt KatotkodvTt ovutapovtoc aiT@ Kai Tod Movoye- 
vov¢. De Orat. § 9, pp. 62, 63. 

| 


194 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


of his mind.”* Now let them have prayed in either of 
these postures, and it is very evident that they could read 
in either of them ; for it is very improbable that they could 
turn over the leaves of a book whilst their hands were ex- 
tended toward heaven in the form of a cross ; or that they 
could read in a book whilst their eyes were lifted up, or 
else quite shut and closed. 

If therefore there had been prescribed and imposed 
forms, they must of necessity have remembered them, 
which would have been an intolerable load to the strongest 
memory, especially to have repeated, word after word, the 
prayers of their fast days, which must have been several 
hours long, since some of their fasts, as will be shown in 
another place, were prolonged from the morning of one 
day to the beginning of another. 

§ 8. There remains now but one question more with 
respect to their public prayers, and that is, whether they 
were divided into several collects? To which I have not 
much certain to answer; probably on their assemblies on 
fast days, when they continued together treble the usual 
time, for the ease of the bishop and his assistants, they 
made several distinct prayers, and probably at their ordin- 
ary meetings, their prayer after sermon was but one 
entire piece. Butall this is but conjecture ; all that I find 
positive is touching their prayer that preceded the conse- 
cration of the eucharistical elements, which, as Justin 
Martyr writes, “ was one long prayer, to which the people 
said, Amen.”? 


4 Micac rove Tie alodjcewc OOVaApodc, Kai éyeipacg Tove THe pr- 
xing. Contra Celsum. lib. 7, p. 362. 

b Ebyapiciay trep Tod KatnsidoSa TobTwr rdép’ abtod éxi Todd 
ToleiTal, OV ovyTEAécarTog Tac Evyuc Kal THY Ebyapiciay, Tac 6 TapHY 
Aaoe érevonuel éywr, "Auyyv. Apolog. 2, p. 97. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 195 


CHAPTER III. 


4 1. Of baptism: the persons baptizing. § 2. The persons baptized : 
first, infants. § 3. Next, adult persons. The qualifications that were 
required in them. §4. The manner of baptism: the person to be 
baptized abjured the devil, the world, and the flesh, and gave his as- 
sent to the fundamental articles of the Christian faith. § 5. A digres- 
sion concerning the ancient creed. ‘The creed commonly called the 
apostles’, not known within the first three hundred years after Christ. 
In those days they had other brief summaries of faith, agreeing in 
sense, but not in words. 46. All the ancient creeds transcribed in 
their original language. § 7. The creed, commonly called the apos- 
tles’, compared with the ancient creeds. § 8. How the creed was 
composed. 


§ 1. Havine in the former chapter discoursed of their 
public prayers, I proceed, in the next place, to consider 
the two sacraments, viz., baptism and the Lord’s supper ; 
and first of all, to treat of that of baptism, together with its 
appendix and confirmation ; for the more methodical and 
distinct handling whereof I shall inquire into these three 
things, viz., The persons baptizing, the persons baptized, 
and the manner of baptism. 

First, as to the persons baptizing, usually they were the 
bishops or pastors of their respective parishes. Justin 
Martyr describes baptism as performed by the mpoecwe, or 
“president ;”* and Tertullian by the antistes, or “ superin- 
tendent ;”» and “by the high priest, who is the bishop ;” 
but ‘“ with his permission and consent, it was allowed to 
presbyters and deacons; and, in case of necessity, even 
to laymen to baptize ;”’4 “ but never, under any necessity 
whatsoever, was it permitted to a woman so to do.”¢ 


a Apolog. 2, p. 97. > De Coron. Milit. p. 336. 
¢ Summus sacerdos qui est episcopus. De Baptism. p. 602. 
4 Dehinc presbyteri et diaconi, non tamen sine episcopi auctoritate 
Laicis etiam jus est sufficiat in necessitatibus. Ibidem, pp. 
602, 603. 

© Mulier non tingendi jus sibi pariet. Ibid. p. 603. 








196 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


§ 2. As for the persons that were baptized, they were 
two sorts, either infants or adult persons. ‘That infants 
were baptized, will be evident from this single consider- 
ation: baptism was always precedent to the Lord’s sup- 
per; and none were admitted to receive the eucharist till 
they were baptized. This is so obvious to every man that 
it needs no proof: if any one doubts it, he may find it 
clearly asserted in the Second Apology of Justin Martyr, 
p- 97. Children received the eucharist in the primitive 
church, which is also a thing so well known, as that for 
the proof of it I shall only urge one passage of Cyprian’s, 
where he tells a long story of a sucking girl, who so vio- 
lently refused to taste the sacramental wine, “that the 
deacon was obliged forcibly to open her lips, and to pour 
down the consecrated wine.”* Therefore it naturally 
follows, that children were baptized ; for if they received 
that ordinance, which always succeeded baptism, then, 
of necessity, they must have received baptism itself. But 
I needed not to have mentioned this consideration, since 
infant baptism is as clearly asserted in words at length in 
the primitive writings as a thing can possibly be. ‘Thus 
Origen writes, that ‘children are baptized for the remis- 
sion of their sins, for the purging away of their natural 
filth and original impurity, which is inherent in them, ac- 
cording to Job xv, 14, ‘What is man, that he should be 
clean? and he that is born of a woman, that he should be 
righteous?’ And that of the prophet Isaiah, chap. iv, ver. 
4,‘ When the Lord shall have washed away the filth of 
the daughter of Sion, and shall have purged the blood of 
Jerusalem from the midst thereof.’ No one is clean from 
the filth; no, though he lived but one day upon the earth. 
Wherefore, because through the sacrament of baptism, the 
uncleannesses of our birth are purged away, therefore 


@ Diaconus reluctanti licet de sacramento calicis infudit. De Lapsis, 
§ 20, p. 284. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 197 


children are baptized.”* And the same father, comment- 
ing on that place of our Saviour, Matthew xviii, 10, “See 
that ye despise not one of these little ones,” alleges this 
as one reason why we should not do so, because of the 
angels that guard them; on which reason he makes this 
query, ‘‘ At what time the angels begin their guardianship 
over those little ones, whether at the time of their birth or 
their baptism?” So that little ones were baptized; by 
which little ones he means infants and children, as is most 
evident from those other titles which he gives them in the 
same tome, as zada, “little children,” vAma, “ infants ;” 
and in one place he supposes them to be “ under three or 
four years old.”¢ 

To these testimonies of Origen I might also add those 
of Ireneus, lib. ii, cap. 39, p. 137, and of Cyprian, De 
Lapsis, § 7, p. 279. But I shall choose to waive them, 
because I would willingly translate at length the deter- 
mination of an African synod, held anno 254, whereat 
were present threescore and six bishops ; the occasion of 
which determination was this: A certain bishop, called 
Fidus, had some scruples, not concerning the baptism of 
infants, but concerning the time of their baptism, whether 
they might be baptized before the second or third day after 
their birth, or before the eighth day, as it was observed 
with respect to circumcision under the Mosaical economy ; 


2 Parvuli baptizantur in remissionem peccatorum ; quorum peccato- 
rum? Vel quo tempore peccaverunt? Aut quomodo potest ulla lava- 
cri in parvulis ratio subsistere, nisi juxta illum sensum de quo paulo an- 
te diximus, nullus mundus a sorde, nec si unius diei quidem fuerit vita 
ejus super terram? Et quia per baptismi sacramentum nativitatis sor- 
des deponuntur, propterea baptizantur et parvuli. In Lucam. Homil. 14. 

> Tlére tov deckvupévwv TOV VO CwTHpog puKpOVv ol Aeyouevoe av- 
Tv dyyehot mpoicavTat, TéTEpov SeFduevot THY oixovouiav TEpl adTov¢ 
diotkeiv ad’ ov bid AovTpod TaALyyeveciacg namo yevéoewo; Com- 
ment. in Mat. tom. 13, p. 331, vol. 1. 

© Méype tpiv Kai teTdptwv étov. Ibid. p. 331. 





198 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


the reasons or grounds for which his scruples he proposed 
to this synod, who, having seriously examined them, unan- 
imously decreed, that children’s baptism was not to be 
deferred so long, but that the grace of God, or baptism, 
should be given to all, and most especially unto infants ; 
which synodical decree, because so pertinent to my pur- 
pose, I have at large transcribed, as follows :— 


Quantum vero ad causam infantium pertinet, quos dix- 
isti intra secundum vel tertium diem quo nati sint consti- 
tutos baptizari non oportere ; et considerandam esse le- 
gem circumcisionis antique, ut intra octavum diem eum 
qui natus est baptizandum et sanctificandum non putares ; 
Jonge aliud in concilio nostro omnibus visum est; in hoc 
enim quod tu putabas esse faciendum, nemo consensit, sed 
universi potius judicavimus, nulli hominum nato misericor- 
diam Dei et gratiam denegandam; nam cum Dominus 
in evangelio suo dicat, Filius hominis non venit animas 
hominum perdere, sed salvare; quantum in nobis est, si 
fieri potest, nulla anima perdenda est. Quid enim ei deest, 
qui semel in utero, Dei manibus formatus est? Nobis 
enim atque oculis nostris, secundum dierum secularium 
cursum, accipere qui nati sunt incrementum videntur : 
ceterum quecunque a Deo fiunt, Dei factoris majestate et 
opere perfecta sunt. Esse denique apud omnes, sive in- 
fantes, sive majores natu, unam divini muneris equalita- 
tem, declarat nobis divine Scripture fides, cum Heliszus 
super infantem Sunamitis vidue filium qui mortuus jace- 
bat, ita se Deum deprecans superstravit, ut capiti ca- 
put, et faciei facies applicaretur, et superfusi Helisei 
membra singulis parvuli membris et pedes pedibus junge- 
rentur. Que res si secundum nativitatis nostre et corpo- 
ris qualitatem cogitetur, adulto et provecto infans non pos- 
set equari, nec cohzrere et suflicere posseni parva mem- 
bra majoribus. Sed illic equalitas divina et spiritualis: 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 199 


exprimitur, quod pares atque equales sint omnes homines, 
quando a Deo semel facti sint, et possit etas nostra in 
incrementis corporum secundum seculum, non secundum 
Deum habere discrimen; nisi si et gratia ipsa, que bap- 
tizatis datur, pro etate accipientium vel minor, vel major 
tribuitur ; cum Spiritus Sanctus non de mensura, sed de 
pietate atque indulgentia paterna equalis omnibus prebe- 
atur. Nam Deus ut personam non accipit, sic nec eta- 
tem, cum se omnibus ad ceelestis gratie consecutionem 
equalitate librata prebeat patrem. 

Nam et quod vestigium infantis, in primis partus sul 
diebus constituti, mundum non esse dixisti, quod unusquis- 
que nostrum adhuc horreat exosculari, nec hoc putamus 
ad celestem gratiam dandam impedimento esse oportere ; 
scriptum est enim, omnia munda sunt mundis ; nec aliquis 
nostrim id debet horrere, quod Deus dignatus est facere. 
Nam etsi adhuc infans a partu novus est, non ita est ta- 
men, ut quisquam illum in gratia danda atque in pace faci- 
enda horrere debeat osculari, quando in osculo infantis 
unusquisque nostrim pro sua religione ipsas adhuc recen- 
tes Dei manus debeat cogitare, quas in homine modo for- 
mato et recens nato quodammodo exosculamur, quando id 
quod Deus fecit, amplectimur. Nam quod in Judaica cir- 
cumcisione carnali octavus dies observabatur, sacramen- 
tum est in umbra atque in imagine ante premissum, sed 
veniente Christo veritate completum. Nam quia octavus 
dies, id est, post sabbatum primus dies futurus erat, quo 
Dominus resurgeret, et nos vivificaret, et circumcisionem 
nobis spiritualem daret, hic dies octavus, id est, post sab- 
batum primus, et Dominicus precessit in imagine, que 
imago cessavit superveniente postmodum veritate, et data 
nobis spirituali circumcisione. Propter quod neminem 
putamus a gratia consequenda impediendum esse ea lege 
que jam statuta est; nec spiritualem circumcisionem im- 
pediri carnali circumcisione debere ; sed omnem omnino 


200 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


hominem admittendum esse ad gratiam Christi, quando et 
Petrus in Actibus Apostolorum loquatur, et dicat, Dominus 
mihi dixit, neminem communem dicendum et immundum. 

Ceterum si homines impedire aliquid ad consecutio- 
nem gratiz posset ; magis adultos et provectos et majores 
natu possent impedire peccata graviora. Porro autem si 
etiam gravissimis delictoribus et in Deum multum ante 
peccantibus, cum postea crediderint, remissa peccatorum 
datur, et 4 baptismo atque a gratia nemo prohibetur; quanto 
magis prohiberi non debet infans, qui recens natus nihil 
peccavit, nisi quod secundum Adam carnaliter natus con- 
tagium mortis antique prima nativitate contraxit? Qui 
ad remissam peccatorum accipiendam hoc ipso facilius ac- 
cedit, quod illi remittuntur non propria, sed aliena peccata. 
Et idcirco, frater charissime, hec fuit in concilio nostra 
sententia, a baptismo atque a gratia Dei, qui omnibus 
misericors et benignus, et pius est, neminem per nos de- 
bere prohiberi. Quod cum circa universos observandum 
sit atque retinendum, tum magis circa infantes ipsos et 
recens natos observandum putamus, qui hoc ipso de ope 
nostra, ac de divina misericordia plus merentur, quod in 
primo statim nativitatis suze ortu plorantes ac flentes nihil 
aliud faciunt quam deprecantur. Apud Cyprian. Epist. 59, 
§ 2, 3, 4, pp. 164, 165. 


“As for the matter of infants, who, you said, were not to 
be baptized within the second or third day after their nati- 
vity, or, according to the law of circumcision, within the 
eighth day thereof; it hath appeared to us in our council 
quite contrary: no one maintained your opinion, but we 
all judged, that the mercy and grace of God was to be 
denied to no man; for since the Lord said in the gospel, 
The Son of man came not to destroy, but to save the souls 
of men; therefore as much as lies in our power, no soul 
is to be lost; for what is there defective in him who has 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 201 


been once formed in the womb by the hands of God?’ To 
us indeed it seems, that children increase as they advance 
in years; but yet, whatever things are made by God are 
perfected by the work and majesty of God their Maker. 
Besides, the Holy Scriptures declare, that both infants and 
adult persons have the same equality in the divine work- 
manship. When Elisha prayed over the dead child of the 
Shunamitish widow, he lay upon the child, and put his 
head upon his head, and his face upon his face, and his 
body upon his body, and his feet upon his feet. This may 
be thought improbable, how the small members of an in- 
fant should equal the big ones of a grown man; but herein 
is expressed the divine and spiritual equality, that all men 
are equal, and alike, when they are made by God; that 
though the increase of our bodies may cause an inequality 
with respect to man, yet not with respect to God; unless 
that that grace, which is given to baptized persons, be more 
or less according to the age of the receivers; but the 
Holy Ghost is given equally to all, not according to mea- 
sure, but according to God’s mercy and indulgence ; for 
as God is no respecter of persons, so neither of years ; he 
equally offers to all the obtaining of his heavenly grace. 

“‘ And whereas you say that an infant for the first days 
after his birth is unclean, so that every one is afraid to kiss 
him, this can be no impediment to his obtainment of 
heavenly grace; for it is written, ‘to the pure all things 
are pure ;’ and none of us should dread that which God 
hath made ; for although an infant be newly born, yet he 
is not so as that we should dread to kiss him; since, in the 
kissing of an infant, we ought to think upon the fresh works 
of God, which in a manner we kiss in an infant newly 
formed and born, when we embrace that which God hath 
made.* And whereas the carnal Jewish circumcision was 

* This they speak with reference to their custom of saluting one an- 
other at the conclusion of their public assemblies. 


Q* 


202 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


performed on the eighth day, that was a type and shadow 
of some future good thing, which Christ, the truth, being 
now come, is done away: because the eighth day, or the 
first day after the sabbath, was to be the day on which our 
Lord should rise and quicken us, and give us the spiritual 
circumcision ; therefore was the carnal circumcision on 
the eighth day, which type is now abolished, Christ the 
truth being come, and having given us the spiritual cir- 
cumcision. Wherefore it is our judgment, that no one 
ought to be debarred from God’s grace by that law, or that 
the spiritual circumcision should be hindered by the car- 
nal one ; but all men ought to be admitted to the grace of 
Christ, as Peter saith in the Acts of the Apostles, that the 
Lord said unto him, that he should call no man common 
or unclean. 

* But if any thimg can hinder men from baptism, it will 
be heinous sins that will debar the adult and mature there- 
from; and if those who have sinned extremely against 
God, yet if afterward they believe, are baptized, and no 
man is prohibited from this grace, how much more ought 
not an infant to be prohibited, who, being but just born, 
is guilty of no sin, but of original, which he contracted from 
Adam? who ought the more readily to be received to the 
remission of sins, because not his own, but others’ sins 
are remitted to him. Wherefore, dearly beloved, it is 
our opinion, that from baptism, and the grace of God, 
who is merciful, kind, and benign to all, none ought to be 
prohibited by us, which, as it is to be observed and followed 
with respect to all, so especially with respect to infants, 
and those that are but just born, who deserve our help, 
and the divine mercy, because at the first instant of their 
nativity they beg it by their cries and tears.” 


So that here is as formal a synodical decree for the 
baptism of infants as possibly can be expected; which, 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 203 


being the judgment of a synod, is more authentic and co- 
gent than that of a private father, it being supposable that 
a private father might write his own particular judgment 
and opinion, but the determinations of a synod or council 
denote the common practice and usage of the whole 
church. 

§ 3. It is evident, then, that infants were baptized in the 
primitive ages; and as for the baptism of the adult, that 
being owned by all, it will be needless to prove it. These 
were persons grown in years, able to judge and choose 
for themselves, who relinquished paganism, and came 
over to the Christian faith. What qualifications were re- 
quired in them previous or antecedent to baptism I need 
not here relate, since I have already handled this point in 
the sixth chapter of the former treatise, to which I refer 
the reader. In short, such as these were first instructed 
in the Christian faith, continued some time in the rank 
of the catechumens, till “they had given good proofs of 
their resolutions to lead a pious, religious life, and had 
protested their assent and consent to all the Christian ver- 
rities, and then they were solemnly baptized.”* Which 
brings me to the third thing proposed, viz., the manner of 
baptism, which, for the main, was as follows :— 

§ 4. The person to be baptized was first asked several 
questions by the bishop, or by him that officiated, unto 
which he was to give his answer, concerning which bap- 
tismal questions and answers Dionysius Alexandrinus 
speaks in his letter to Xystus, bishop of Rome, wherein he 
writes of a certain scrupulous person in his church, who 
was exceedingly troubled, when he was present at bap- 
tism, and “ heard the questions and answers of those that 


2”Ooot av TetodGor kal Ticevdow GAndh Taita Ta bd’ Huey OLdao- 
Koueva Kat Aeyoueva eiva, Kat Bioiv obtwc divaodar UrLoxvevTat 
éretta dyovra vo’ juov via tdwp éci, &c. Justin. Martyr. 
Apolog. 2, p. 93. 





204 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


were baptized.”* Which questions Firmilian styles, “ the 
lawful and usual interrogatories of baptism.”” Now these 
questions and answers were two-fold: first, of abjuration 
of the devil and all his works: and, secondly, of a firm 
assent to the articles of the Christian faith. First, of abju- 
ration: the minister proposed this question to the party 
baptized, or to this effect, Do you renounce the devil, the 
world, and the flesh? To which he answered, Yes. So 
writes Tertullian, ‘‘ When we are baptized, we renounce 
the world, the devil, and his angels.”* And “ with our 
mouth we have vowed to renounce the world, the devil, 
and his angels.”¢ And “we have renounced the devil 
and his angels.”« And “ thou hast covenanted to renounce 
the world, the devil, and his angels.”* And “ we were 
called to the warfare of the living God, when we promised 
in the words of baptism.” To the same effect also says 
Cyprian, “‘ When we were baptized, we renounced the 
world.” And “ we have renounced the world, its pomps 
and delights.” And “ the servant of God has renounced 


a Kal tév éxnpwrhoewy Kal arokpiocewv éexakotoac. Apud Euseb. 
lib. 7, cap. 9, p. 254. 

» Usitata et legitima verba interrogationis. Apud Cyprian. Epist. 
75, § 10, p. 238. 

¢ Contestamur nos renunciare diabolo et pompz et angelis ejus. De 
Corona Militis, p. 336. 

4 Renunciasse nos diabolo et angelis ejus ore nostro contestamur. De 
Spectac. p. 583. 

¢ Renunciavimus diabolo, et pompe, et angelis ejus. De Idololat. 
p- 618. 

f Pactus es renunciare diabolo, et pompe, et angelis ejus. Lib. de 
Anima, cap. 17, p. 554. 

8 Vocati sumus ad militiam Dei vivi, jam tune cum in sacramenti 
verba spondimus. Ad Martyr. p. 367. 

h Seculo renunciaveramus cum baptizatisumus. Epist. 7, § 5, p. 20. 

i Mundi pompis et deliciis jam tune renunciavimus. De Hab. Virg. 
§ 6, p. 267. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. b 205 


> 


the devil and the world.”* And “ we have renounced the 
world, and, by the faith of spiritual grace, have cast off its 
riches and pomps.”» And ‘ we have renounced the devil 
and the world.”* And so likewise saith Clemens Alex- 
andrinus, that in baptism ‘“‘ we renounced the devil.”4 

The second question was, whether the party to be bap- 
tized did believe all the articles of the Christian faith, to 
which he answered, Yes, as Justin Martyr writes, “That 
those who were to be baptized were to give their assent 
to the things that were taught and held by them.”* So 
Cyprian writes, “‘ That at baptism they asked the baptized 
person’s assent to this creed, whether he believed in God 
the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, remission of sins, and 
eternal life through the church?” And that at baptism 
they asked, “ Dost thou believe the life everlasting, and 
remission of sins through the holy church?”s These arti- 
cles of faith to which the baptized persons gave their 
assent, are called by Cyprian, “the law of the symbol,” 
and by Novatian, “the rule of truth.”! 

§ 5. And here since we have mentioned the symbol, it 
will be no unuseful digression to inquire a little into the 


* Dei servus——diabolo jam renunciarat et seculo. De Lapsis, § 6, 
p-. 279. 

> Seculo renunciavimus, et divitias ejus et pompas fide gratie spiri- 
tualis abjecimus. De Orat. Dom. § 14, p. 213. 

¢ Diabolo et mundo renunciavimus. De Bono Patientie, $7, p. 365. 

4 *AroTacoouévav nudv Tai¢ Tovnpaic dpyaic. Theod. Epist. p. 573. 

© ’Ooo dv Tetcd@ot Kai Ticevdoly aAndy raiTa Tadd’ Hudv didac- 
Komeva Kai Aeyoueva elvat, &c. Apolog. 2, p. 93. 

f Symbolo baptizare, ndsse Deum Patrem, Filium Christum, Spiritum 
Sanctum, credis remissionem peccatorum, et vitam zternam per sanc- 
tam ecclesiam? Epist. 76, § 6, p. 248. 

¢ Credis in vitam eternam, et remissionem peccatorum per sanctam 
ecclesiam? Epist. 70, § 2, p. 211. 

h Symbolilegem. Epist. 76, § 6, p. 248. 

i Regula veritatis. De Trinitate inter Opera Tertul. p. 493. 


206 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


ancient creeds ; for as for that creed which is commonly 
called the apostles’, all learned persons are now agreed 
that it was never composed by them, neither do I find it 
within my prescribed time: but though they had not that, 
yet they had other creeds very like thereunto, which con- 
tained the fundamental articles of the Christian faith, unto 
which all Christians gave their assent and consent, and 
that publicly at baptism; whence, as before, it is called by 
Cyprian, “ the law of the symbol ;” and by Novatian, “ the 
rule of truth.” 

This creed was handed down from father to son, as a 
brief summary of the necessary Scripture truths, not in 
ipsissimis verbis, or in the same set words, but only the 
sense or substance thereof, which is evident from hence, 
that we never find the creed twice repeated in the same 
words, no, not by one and the same father ; which, that it 
may the more manifestly appear, as also that we may see 
the congruity and affinity of the ancient creeds with our 
present creed, commonly called the apostles’, I shall tran- 
scribe in their original language all the whole creeds, and 
pieces of creeds, that I find within my limited bounds, 
which, together with the authors wherein they are to be 
found, are as follows :— 


§ 6. Kadddnre oby érav tyiv yopic "Inco Xpicod AadH tic, Tod 
éx yévouvg AaBid, tod éx Mapiac, d¢ GAndG¢ éyevvndn, Epayév Te 


s 


kal éxiev, dAndac edioyxSy eri Tlovriov TuAdrov, dAndGc écavpoby, 
kai aréSavev, BAenévtTwy Tov éExovpaviwr, éxtyeiwv, Kai dT0x8o- 
viwv O¢ Kat GAnda¢ HyépSn and vexpdv, éyeipavTo¢g abTov Tod Ila- 
TPOG AUTOD KATA TO Guoiwpa, We Kal Hud¢ Tove TiCEebovTac abTH ov- 
tw¢ éyepet 6 Iatyp abtot év Xpic@ “Inood. Ignat. Epist. ad 
Tralles. p. 52. 


‘H pév yap éxkAnoia Kairep kad’ Ane tie oikovpévne boo Tepd- 
TwV THe yi¢ Oleomapuévyn, Tapa O& TOV aTocéAwY Kal TOV éxeivwr 


Ladytav mapadaBoica THY, sic Eva Oedv Tlatépa wavtoKpdropa, Tov 








THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 207 


METOLNKOTA TOV OvpavoY Kal THY yHVv, Kal Tug Vaddooas, Kai TavTa 
Ta év avtoic, Ticty: Kal ei¢ va Xpicdv "Inoody, tov Yidv tod Oeod, 
Tov capkwtévra brep Theo MueTEpac owrnpiac, Kal ei¢ Tvetpa “Ayiov 
TO Ola TOY TPOdNTGV KEKNPYXOE TAG OikoVvomiac Kai Tae éAEboELC, Kal 
Thy éx mapSévov yévrnow, Kai TO TaVOC, Kal THY éyEepoly eK VEK- 
pov, Kat THY Evoapkov eic Tod Oipavor’s avdAypLY Tod HyaTnMévoD 
Xpicod "Iyood rod Kupiov nudv, kai tHv ék Tév obpavayv vy TH 
66m tov Ilatpo¢ mapovoiav avtod, éni 7d avaxedadratocacvar Ta 
mdvTa, Kai avachoal macav cdpka Tdonc avdpwrdtntos, iva Xpic@ 
Inoot 76 Kupiw judy Kai OG, owripr, Kat BactAei Kata THY eddo- 
kiav tov Ilatpi¢ rod dopdrov Trav you Kappy éerovpaviwy, Kal ér- 
Yeiwvr, Kat KatayVoviwr, Kai Taoa yAdooa éouohoynontat ait, Kal 
Kpiow Otkaiav év Toi¢g Tuol ToLnoNTAaL Ta Mev TYEVMATLKG THC TOVH- 
piac, Kat ayyéAove Tove TapaBEeByKdTac, Kat év aToCacia yeyovdrac, 
kat Tove doeBeic Kal adixove, Kal avduovc, Kat BAaodhuove TOY dr- 
Bporwv cic TO aiaviov rip wéupyn’ Toic dé dikatiolg Kat doiolc, Kat 
Tac évToAde adtod TeTNpHKOOL, Kai év TH ayaTy aVTEs OLapEevEevynKoor, 
Toig an’ apyfc, toic dé ék peTavolac, Cunv yaptoduevoc, adapoiav 
dwphontat, kai défav aidviov repiroujon. Ireneeus, lib. 1, cap. 
2, pp. 35, 36. 


‘Credo in unum Deum fabricatorem ceeli ac terre, et 
omnium que in eis sunt, per Christum Jesum Dei Filium, 
qui propter eminentissimam erga figmentum suum dilecti- 
onem, eam que esset eX Virgine, generationem sustinuit, 
ipse per se hominem adunans Deo, et passus sub Pontio 
Pilato, et resurgens, et in claritate receptus, in gloria ven- 
turus Salvator eorum qui salvantur, et Judex eorum qui 
judicantur, et mittens in ignem eternum transfiguratores 
veritatis, et contemptores Patris sui et adventus ejus.’ 
Ireneus, lib. 3, cap. 4, p. 172. 


“Regula est autem fidei, ut jam hine quid credamus, 
profiteatur, illa scilicet, qua creditur unum omnino Deum 
esse, nec alium preter mundi creatorem, qui universa de 


208 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


nihilo produxerit per verbum suum, primo omnium demis- 
sum: id verbum Filium ejus appellatum, nomine Dei, va- 
rie visum patriarchis, in prophetis semper auditum, pos- 
tremo delatum ex Spiritu Patris Dei et virtute in Virgin- 
em Mariam, carnem factum in utero ejus, et ex ea natum, 
egisse Jesum Christum, exinde predicasse novam legem 
et novam promissionem regni celorum, virtutes fecisse, 
fixum cruci tertia die resurrexisse, In celos ereptum, se- 
dere ad dexteram Patris, misisse vicariam vim Spiritus 
Sancti, qui credentes agant, venturum cum claritate ad 
sumendos sanctos in vite eterne, et promissorum celes- 
tium fructum, et ad prophanos adjudicandos igni perpetuo, 
facta utriusque partis resuscitatione cum carnis resti- 
tutione. Hee regula a Christo instituta nullas habet 
apud nos questiones, nisi quas hereses inferunt, et que 
hereticos faciunt.” 'Tertul. de Prescript. advers. Heret. 
p- 73. 





‘*Unicum quidem Deum credimus, sub hac tamen dis- 
pensatione quam oixovouiav dicimus, ut unici Dei sit et 
Filius sermo ipsius, qui ex ipso processerit, per quem om- 
nia facta sunt, et sine quo factum est nihil. Hunc missuma 
Patre in virginem, et ex ea natum hominem et Deum, 
Filium hominis et Filium Dei, et cognominatum Jesum 
Christum. Hunc passum, hunc mortuum et sepultum se- 
cundum Scripturas, et resuscitatum a Patre, et in celo 
resumptum, sedere ad dexteram Patris, venturum judicare 
vivos et mortuos, qui exinde miserat secundum promis- 
sionem suama Patre Spiritum Sanctum Paracletum, Sanc- 
tificatorem fidei eorum qui credunt in Patrem, et Filium, 
et Spiritum Sanctum. Hane regulam ab initio evangelii 
decucurrisse, &c.” ‘Tertul. advers. Praxean. p. 316. 


“ Regula fidei una omnino est, sola immobilis et irre- 
formabilis credendi scilicet in unicum Deum Omnipoten- 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 209 


tem, mundi conditorem, et Filium ejus Jesum Christum, 
natum ex Virgine Maria, crucifixum sub Pontio Pilato, 
tertio die resuscitatum a mortuis, receptum in ccelis, se- 
dentem nunc ad dexteram Patris, venturum judicare vivos 
et mortuos, per carnis etiam resurrectionem.” ‘Tertullian 
de Virginib. Veland. p. 385. 


Tlicedoov dre el¢ é5tv 6 Oedc, 6 Ta TayYTA KTioag, Kal KaTapTicac, 
Kal Toljoac, ék TOD MH SvTog Ele TO elvat TA TaVTAa, ypH dé Kal TLO- 
Tevelv 6Tt Kipioc "Inoot¢ Xpicic, kal wdon TH Tepit avTod Kata TOV 
Sedtyta kal THY avOpardryta GAnSeia, dei Kai ei¢ TO “Aytov IIvev- 
pa miceverv’ Kat Ste abtetovouos dvTeg KoAatsueba pév 26’ ol¢ duap- 
Tavopev, Tidpeda J? é¢’ oi¢ eb TpdtTouev. Origen. Comment. 
in Johan. tom. 32, p. 397, vol. 2. 


“ Unus Deus est, qui omnia creavit, atque composuit, 
quique ex nullis fecit esse universa, Deus a prima creatura 
et conditione mundi omnium justorum,Deus Adam, Abel, 
Seth, Enos, &c. Et quod hic Deus in novissimis diebus, si- 
cut per prophetas suos ante promiserat, misit Dominum 
nostrum Jesum Christum, primo quidem vocaturum Israel, 
secundo vero etiam gentes post perfidiam populi Israel. 
Hic Deus justus et bonus Pater Domini nostri Jesu Christi, 
legem et prophetas et evangelia ipse dedit, qui et aposto- 
lorum Deus est, et Veteris et Novi Testamenti: tum deinde 
quia Jesus Christus ipse qui venit, ante omnem creaturam 
natus ex Patre est: qui cum in omnium conditione Patri 
ministrasset (per ipsum enim omnia facta sunt) novissimis 
temporibus seipsum exinaniens homo factus est, incarnatus 
est cum Deus esset, et homo mansit quod Deus erat. 
Corpus assumpsit corpori nostro simile, eo solo differens, 
quod natum ex virgine et Spiritu Sancto est, et quoniam 
hic Jesus Christus natus et passus est in veritate, et non 
per imaginem, communem hanc mortem vere mortuus est; 
vere enim a morte resurrexit, et post resurrectlonem con- 
versatus cum discipulis suis, assumptus est. 


210 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


“Tum deinde honore ac dignitate Patri ac Filio socia- 
tum tradiderunt Spiritum Sanctum. In hoc non jam mani- 
feste discernitur, utrum natus aut innatus. Sed inquirenda 
jam ista pro viribus sunt de sacra Sciptura, et sagaci per- 
quisitione investiganda, sane quod iste Spiritus Sanctus 
unumquemque sanctorum vel prophetarum, vel apostolorum 
inspiravit, et non alius Spiritus in veteribus, alius vero in 
his, qui in adventu Christi inspirati sunt, manifestissime 
in ecclesiis predicatur. Post hee jam, quod anima sub- 
stantiam, vitamque habens propriam, cum ex hoc mundo 
discesserit, et pro suis meritis dispensabit, sive vite eterne 
ac beatitudinis hereditate potitura, si hoc ei sua gesta pre- 
stiterint ; sive igne eterno ac suppliciis mancipanda, si in 
hoc eam scelerum culpa detorserit. Sed et quia erit tem- 
pus resurrectionis mortuorum, cum corpus hoc quod in 
corruptione seminatur, surget In incorruptione, et quod 
seminatur in ignominia, surget in gloria.” Origen in Pro- 
zm. lib. rept apyav. 


“ Credis in Deum Patrem, Filium Christum, Spiritum 
Sanctum, remissionem peccatorum, et vitam eternam per 
sanctam ecclesiam?” Cyprian. Epist. 76, § 6, p. 248. 


Eic Ocd¢, TLaryp Adyov favtoc, codiac bdecwonc, Kai dvvdpewc, 
Kal yapaxthpoc Gaidiov, TéAeLog Tedeiov yevvATup, IlaTyp Yiod povo- 
yevoic, cig Kipioc, udvog éx povov, Oed¢ éx Oeod, Yapaxtyp Kai ei- 
KOv THC EdTHTOC, Adyoc évepybc, codia THE TGV bAwY CUSdoEwS TE- 
plextixy’ Kal dbvapic, Kal The bAnc KTicgswo ToLNTLKH, Vlog GAnSLVOC 
GAndivod Tlatpdc, aépatog dopdtov, kai adSaptoc adddprov, Kai 
avavatoc avavdrov, Kat aidiocg aidiov' Kai év IIvetua “Aylov, éx 
Ocod THY traps éywv, Kal Ov viod mednvoc, dnAady Toi¢g avOpa- 
Tole’ eikav Tod viod, TEAeiov TEleia Cun, CovTwr aitia, Thyn ayia, 

‘ 


FAS, e ~ x 2 . ~ ‘ ¢ ‘ 2oeN 

ayloTnc, aytaonod yopnyoc, év © davepodtar Bede Oo Tarp 6 émt 

TAVTWY Kal év Taol, Kal Osdc 6 Yldc 6 Oia TdvTwY* TpLag TeAEia, 
¢ ‘ 


66&) Kat aidiornTe Kat PBaotdsia py pepifouévn, unde AradAdortpiov- 
pévn. Gregor. Neocesar. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 211 


§ 7. These are all the creeds that I have met with, in 
which the words are various, but generally recurring to 
the same sense; it would be too tedious to translate them 
all; wherefore I shall sum them up in the creed, commonly 
called the apostles’, and thereby show their congruity and 
agreement, as also, what is in the apostles’ creed more 
than in these. Now the articles of the apostles’ creed 
that are to be found in the forementioned creeds are as 
follows :— 

“T believe in God the Father Almighty, maker of heaven 
and earth, and in Jesus Christ his only Son, our Lord, who 
was conceived by the Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin 
Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead, 
and buried. The third day he rose again from the 
dead, ascended into heaven, sitteth at the right hand of 
God the Father Almighty, from whence he shall come to 
judge both the quick and the dead. I believe in the Holy 
Ghost, the holy catholic church, the forgiveness of 
sins, the resurrection of the body, and the life everlasting.” 

Here are now two clauses of our present creed want- 
ing, viz., “He descended into hell,” and “ The commu- 
nion of saints.” 

§ 8. If we would know how they were added, we must 
first consider how the whole creed was framed, which I 
conceive was done these two ways: 

First. Some of the articles were derived down from the 
very days of the apostles. 

Secondly. Others were afterward added in opposition to 
heresies, as they sprung up in the church. 

First. Some of the articles were derived down from the 
very days of the apostles; such were these: “I believe 
in God the Father, (or, as the Greek creeds read it, “ in 
one God, the Father,” in opposition to the polytheism of 
the heathens,) “ and in Jesus Christ his only begotten Son 
our Lord: I believe in the Holy Ghost, the resurrection 








212 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


of the body, and the life everlasting.” For in the days 
of the apostles, as well as afterward, it was the practice 
at baptism to demand the baptized person’s assent to the 
fundamental articles of the Christian faith, as Philip did 
the eunuch, Acts viii, 37; amongst which fundamentals 
we may be certain they reckoned the doctrine of the Trin- 
ity, because they were baptized in the name, and dedicated 
to the service of the Trinity ; and that of the unity of the 
Godhead, because it was the great drift and design of their 
preaching to overturn the pagans’ multiplicity of deities ; 
and that of the resurrection of the body, and the life ever- 
lasting, because that was the characteristic or peculiar 
doctrine of the Christian religion, by which it was emi- 
nently distinguished from other sects and opinions, and 
was the only comfort and support of the Christians under 
their sufferings and martyrdoms, according to that of St. 
Paul, 1 Corinthians xv, 29, “If the dead rise not at all, 
why are they then baptized for the dead 2” 

As for the other articles of the creed, viz., such as are 
predicated of Christ, as “ his being conceived of the Holy 
Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary,” &c., and those other 
two, “the holy catholic church,” and, ‘“ the forgiveness 
of sins,” I conceive them to be introduced the second way, 
viz., 1M opposition to heresies as they sprung up in the 
church, as “was conceived by the Holy Ghost,” in 
opposition to the Carpocratians, Ebionites, and Cerinth- 
ians, who taught that Christ was born in the ordinary 
and common way, as other men and women are: “ was 
born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate,” 
&c., in contradiction to the Docete, Simonians, and 
others, who aflirmed Christ to be a man, not really, but 
only fantastically, or in appearance; of which heretics 
Ignatius speaks, and against them his forementioned 


a”Aricot Tie Aéyovolv TO doxeiv aitov metovbévat. Epist. ad 
Symin. p. 2. 





SS eee 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 21a 


creed seems particularly to be levelled. “The remis- 
sion of sins,” against the Basilidians, who held that not all 
sins, but only involuntary ones would be remitted ; or ra- 
ther against the Novatians, who denied remission to the 
lapsed: “the holy catholic church,” to exclude thereby 
all heretics and schismatics from being within the pale 
thereof. 

By these two ways then was the creed composed, and 
by the latter hereof were those two articles introduced, 
of Christ’s descent into hell, and of the communion of 
saints. The communion of saints was brought in last of 
all. The descent into hell toward the latter end of the 
fourth century, into the manner and occasion whereof, as 
also the intent and meaning of this article, [ had designed 
once to inquire, having made some collections* concern- 
ing it; but finding I should then be forced to pass the 
limits of my prescribed time, I have thought it expedient 
to omit it, and to return to those points from whence I have 
so long digressed. 


CHAPTER IV. 


§ 1. Of godfathers. § 2. Exorcism preceded baptism: the form and 
reason thereof. § 3. Next came baptism itself: the sacramental 
water consecrated by prayer. § 4. The person baptized in the name 
of the Trinity. §5. Immersion or dipping generally used. § 6. Some- 
times perfusion, or sprinkling. The validity thereof considered. 
§ 7. After baptism followed prayers. 


§ 1. Havine in the former chapter made a little digres- 
sion, | now return to the matter that first occasioned it, 

* These collections were afterward published in 8vo. under the title 
~ of “History of the Apostles’ Creed, with critical Observations on its 
several Articles,” &c. 


214 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


which was the questions proposed to the persons to be 
baptized, unto which adult persons answered for them- 
selves, and susceptors or godfathers for children. Of 
these susceptors, or sponsors, ‘Tertullian speaks where he 
thus adviseth the delay of children’s baptism: ‘ What 
necessity is there that sponsors should expose themselves 
to danger, who, through death, may fail of the performance 
of their promises, or may be deceived by the wicked dis- 
position of those they promise for.”* Whether the use 
of sponsors was from the apostles’ days, I cannot deter- 
mine, unless the negative may be conjectured from Justin 
Martyr, Tertullian’s senior by fifty years, who, when he 
enumerates the method and form of baptism, says not one 
word of sponsors or godfathers, as may be seen in his Se- 
cond Apology, pages 93, 94. 

§2. When these questions and answers were ended, 
then followed exorcization, the manner and end whereof 
was this: the minister put his hands on the person’s head 
that was to be baptized, and breathed in his face, implying 
thereby the exorcization, or expelling of the devil or evil 
spirit from him, and a preparing of him for baptism and 
confirmation, when and where the Good and Holy Spirit 
was conferred and given. 

This practice I find mentioned by Clemens Alexandri- 
nus, who speaks of the 7d éopx:Géuevor,» or exorcism before 
baptism, but more fully by some of those bishops that were 
present at that famous council of Carthage, held anno 258, 
in whose determinations exorcization is required as pre- 
vious and antecedent to baptism. Thus in that of Cres- 
cens, bishop of Cirta, “I judge,” saith he, “that all here- 
tics and schismatics, who would come to the catholic 


@ Quid enim necesse est sponsores etiam periculo ingeri, qui et ipsi 
per mortalitatem destituere promissiones suas possunt, et proventu ma- 
le indolis fallit De Baptism. p. 603. 

» Theodos. Epitom. p. 573. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 215 


church are not to be admitted till they have been first ex- 
orcized and baptized.”* So also said Lucius, bishop of 
Thebeste ; ‘It is my opinion that all heretics are to be 
exorcized and baptized.”» And thus more clearly Vin- 
centius, bishop of Thibaris ; ‘‘ We know heretics to be 
worse than heathens. If therefore they would turn and 
come to the Lord, we have a rule of truth, which the Lord 
commanded the apostles saying, Go, in my name, lay on 
hands, and cast out devils, (Mark xvi, 17,) and in another 
place, Go and teach all nations, baptizing them in the 
name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, 
(Matthew xxviii, 19.) Therefore first let them come by 
imposition of hands in exorcism, and then by the regene- 
ration of baptism, that so they may be made partakers of 
Christ’s promises ; but otherwise I think they cannot.’ 

From this last determination we may observe the rea- 
son of these exorcisms, which arose from a misunder- 
standing of Christ’s valedictory speech to his disciples in 
Mark xvi,17, &c. In the sixteenth verse of that chapter 
he commanded them to go forth, preaching the gospel, 
and to baptize, which was to be an unalterable, perpetual 
ministration to the end of the world. Then he proceeds 
to tell them, verses 17, 18, that for the speedier propaga- 


a Censeo omnes hereticos et schismaticos, qui ad catholicam eccle- 
siam voluerint venire, non ante ingredi, nisi exorcizati et baptizati prius 
fuerint. Apud Cyprian. p. 445. 

® Hereticos——censeo exorcizandos et baptizandos esse. Ibidem. 
p. 447. 

° Hereticos scimus pejores esse quam ethnicos: si ergo conversi ad 
Dominum yenire voluerint, habemus utique regulam veritatis, quam 
Dominus precepto divino mandavit apostolis, dicens: ite in nomine 
meo, manum imponite, demonia expellite ; et alio loco, ite, docete 
gentes, baptizantes eos in nomine Patris, et Filii, et Spiritus Sancti ; 
ergo primo per manus impositionem in exorcismo ; secundo per baptismi 
regenerationem, tunc possunt ad Christi pollicitationem venire : alias 
autem fieri censeo non debere. Ibid. p. 447. 


216 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


tion of the gospel, and that the heathens might the more 
readily embrace it, he would confer on them, and the first 
preachers thereof, the gift of working miracles, that in his 
name they should cast out devils, and speak with new 
tongues, as they most eminently did at the day of pente- 
cost; that they should take up serpents, as Paul did at 
Malta, without receiving any injury; and if they drunk 
any deadly thing it should not hurt them; they should lay 
hands on the sick, and they should recover: all which 
they did, as ecclesiastical histories abundantly testify ; 
and St. Mark closes this chapter, and his gospel, with 
saying, that when the apostles went forth and preached, 
“the Lord wrought with them, and confirmed the word 
with signs following.” So that these were extraordinary 
actions peculiarly promised to the apostles and first 
preachers of the faith of Christ. 

But now it is evident from the forementioned determin- 
ation of Vincentius, bishop of Thibaris, that in his age 
they apprehended them to be, like baptism, ordinary and 
standing administrations in the church, and so mistaking 
in the sense of the forecited text, introduced for an ordi- 
nary and constant practice, that which was promised by 
Christ for an extraordinary and miraculous gift. Christ 
promised his apostles the miraculous power of casting 
devils out of bodies possessed by them: but these fathers 
understood this promise of the common spiritual effects 
of the gospel, which, where it is believingly received, 
delivers that person from the delusion and dominion of the 
devil, under which we all naturally are, being by nature 
children of wrath; and for the declaration of this invisible 
freedom and deliverance, which they all thought to be in 
or about baptism, they made use of this external sign of 
exorcism just before baptism, to declare thereby, that now 
the unclean devil, with all his power and tyranny, was 
cast out of that person, who was now going, in and by 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. Pn i 


baptism, to be consecrated to the service of a better Mas- 
ter, viz., of the blessed Trinity, Father, Son, and Holy 
Ghost, God blessed for evermore. 

§ 3. When exorcization was finished, then came bap- 
tism itself; and the person being ready to be baptized, the 
minister, by prayer, consecrated the water for that use, 
because it was not any water, but only “ that water,” as 
Sedatus, bishop of Turbo, writes, “‘ which is sanctified in 
the church by the prayers of the minister, that washeth 
away sin.”* Itis true, indeed, as Tertullian writes, “ that 
any waters may be applied to that use, but then God must 
be first invocated, and then the Holy Ghost presently 
comes down from heaven, moves upon them, and sancti- 
fies them.”® ‘ Wherefore,” saith Cyprian, “the water 
must be cleansed and sanctified by the priest, that by its 
washing it may wash away the sins of the man that is 
baptized.’ 

§ 4. The water being consecrated, the person was then 
baptized in the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the 
Holy Ghost. So writes Justin Martyr, “ They are bap- 
tized in the name of God the Father, Lord of all, and of 
our Saviour, Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Ghost.”¢ For, 
as Clemens Alexandrinus says, “The baptized person, by 
this dedication to the blessed Trinity, is delivered from the 
corrupt trinity, viz., the devil, the world, and the flesh, and 


a Aqua sacerdotis prece in ecclesia sanctificata abluit delicta. Act. 
Concil. Carthag. apud Cyprian. p. 446. 

> Omnes aque de pristina originis prerogativa sacramentum sancti- 
ficationis consequuntur invocato Deo: supervenit enim statim Spiritus 
de ceelis et aquis superest sanctificans eas, &c. De Baptism. p. 598. 

© Oportet ergo mundari et sanctificari aquam prius a sacerdote, ut 
possit baptismo suo peccata hominis qui baptizatur abluere. Epist. 70, 
§ 2, p. 211. 

WE’ dvouatoc yap tov Iarpoc trav bAwr, Kai SecrbTov Oeod, kai Tov 
owtHpoc juav "Inood Xpicov, Kai Ilvedpartocg ‘Ayiov, To év TH bdaTeL TOTE 
Aovtpov rovotvta. Apolog. 2, p. 94. 

10 


218 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


is now sealed by the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.”+ 
This baptizing in the name of the Trinity, Origen terms, 
‘the invocation of the adorable Trinity.”> 

§ 5. As for the quantity of water employed in baptism, 
that is, whether they sprinkled or dipped, to me it seems 
evident that their usual custom was to immerse or dip the 
whole body. When St. Barnabas describes a baptized 
person by his going down into the water, “ We go down,” 
saith he, ‘“‘into the water full of sin and filth, but we 
ascend with fruit and benefit in our hearts.”° And so 
Tertullian represents baptized persons as ‘entered into 
the water.”4 And as “let down into the water.”e And 
Justin Martyr describes the same “ by being washed in 
water;”f and calls the place where they are baptized Aov- 
tpov, “¢a washing place,’s or “a bath ;” whence Firmilian, 
inveighing against the baptism of heretics, condemns it as 
carnal, and as being, upon that account, no whit “ different 
from the baptism or washing of the Jews ; which they used 
as a common and ordinary bath to wash away the filth 
of their bodies.”* 

§ 6. But though immersion was their usual custom, yet 
perfusion or sprinkling was not accounted unlawful ; but, 





2 Ava TplOv dvoudtov maone TIE év PIopa TpLadog arndrdayn 
dua Tatpdc, kat Yiov, kai ‘Ayiov Uvetyatoc odpaytotetc. Theod. 
Epitom. p. 573. 


’ THe mpooxvyynti¢e Tptadoc éxixAnorc. Comment. in Johan. vol. 2, 


tom. 8, p. 124. 

© ‘Hueic pév xataBaivouer eic TO bdwp yéwovTec GwapTLOv Kal PUToD, 
Kat avaBaivouev Kaprogopodvtec év tH Kapdia. Epist. Cathol. § 9, 
p- 235. 

¢ Aquam ingressi. De Spectaculis, p. 583. 

e In aqua demissus. De Baptismo, p. 597. 

f "Ky tO bdartt Aovtpov rootvtar. Apolog. 2, p. 94. 

& Ibidem ut supra. 

h Nihil differt 4 Judeorum baptismo, quo sic illi utuntur, ut eo tan- 
quam communi et vulgari lavacro tantum sordes laventur. Apud 
Cyprian. Epist. 75, § 11, p. 189. 


ee ea eT Se 


el? 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 219” 


in cases Of necessity, that was used, as in clinic baptism; 
which was, when sick persons, whose death they appre- 
hended, were baptized in their beds ; as Novatian, “ being 
sick and near death, as was supposed, was baptized in his 
bed by perfusion, or pouring on of water.’ 

It is true, indeed, this baptism was not generally es- 
teemed as perfect as the more solemn baptism ; for which 
reason it was a custom in some churches not to advance 
any to clerical orders who had been so baptized; an in- 
stance whereof we have in the church of Rome, where 
the ordination of Novatian to be a presbyter “‘ was op- 
posed by all the clergy, and by many of the laity, as un- 
lawful, because of his clinic perfusion.” But yet, that 
they held it not altogether, or absolutely unlawful to be 
done, appears from that on the entreaties of the bishop 
they consented that he should be ordained, as he accord- 
ingly was. And Cyprian, in a set discourse on this sub- 
ject, declares that he thought this baptism to be as perfect 
and valid as that done more solemnly by immersion ; for, 
when one Magnus wrote to him desiring his opinion whe- 
ther those were truly baptized who, through their infirmi- 
ties, were not dipped, but only perfused or aspersed, he 
answered :— 


Nos, quantum concipit mediocritas nostra, estimamus 

in nullo mutilari et -debilitari posse divina beneficia, nec 
minus aliquid illic posse contingere, ubi plena et tota fide 
et dantis et sumentis accipitur, quod de divinis muneribus 
hauritur. Neque enim sic in sacramento salutari delicto- 


aNéow mepimecov yarery, Kat arodaveiotar doov oidétw vouttd- 
pevoc, év adth Th KAivy h Execto mepiyvdele EAaBev. Epist. Comel. ad 
Fabium Antioch. apud Euseb. lib. 6, cap. 43, p. 249. 

> AvaxwAvopuevoc dnd TavTo¢ TOD KAHpoV, GAAG Kal Aaikdv TOAAGY, 
érel un &&ov Hv Tov eri Khivyg dia vocov mepiyvdévra ei¢ KARpoV TWA 
yevéodat. Ex Epist. Cornel. ad Fabium Antioch. apud Euseb. lib. 6, 
cap. 43, p. 248. 





220 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


rum contagia, ut in lavacro carnali et seculari sordes cutis 
et corporis abluuntur, ut aphronitris et ceteris quoque ad- 
jumentis, et solio et piscina opus sit, quibus ablui et mun- 
dari corpusculum possit. Aliter pectus credentis abluitur, 
aliter mens hominis per fidei merita mundatur. In sacra- 
mentis salutaribus necessitate cogente, et Deo indulgen- 
tiam suam largiente, totum credentibus conferunt divina 
compendia. Nec quemquam movere debet, quod aspergi 
vel perfundi videantur egri, cum gratiam dominicam con- 
sequuntur, quando Scriptura Sancta per Ezechielem pro- 
phetam loquatur et dicat. Et aspergam super vos aquam 
mundam, et mundabimini ab omnibus immunditiis vestris, 
et ab omnibus simulachris vestris emundabo vos, et dabo 
vobis cor novum, et spiritum novum dabo in vobis. Item 
in Numeris. Et homo qui fuerit immundus usque ad ves- 
peram, hic purificabitur die tertio, et die septimo, et mun- 
dus erit; si autem non fuerit purificatus die tertio, et die 
septimo, non erit mundus, et exterminabitur anima illa 
de Israel, quoniam aqua aspersionis non est super eum 
sparsa. Etiterum. Et locutus est Dominus ad Moysen, 
dicens, Accipe Levitas de medio filiorum Israel, et purifi- 
cabis eos, et ita facies eis purificationem eorum, circum- 
sparges eos aqua purificationis ; et iterum, aqua aspersi- 
onis purificatio est. Unde apparet aspersionem quoque 
aque instar salutaris lavacri obtinere; et quando hec in 
ecclesia fiunt, ubi sit et dantis et accipientis fides integra, 
stare omnia et consummari ac perfici posse majestate 
domini et fidei veritate. Epist. 76. § 9, pp. 249, 250. 


“That as he could conceive, he apprehended that the 
divine benefits could in no wise be mutilated, or weakened, 
nor that less thereof could be bestowed, where the divine 
gifts are received with a sound and full faith, both of giver 
and receiver: for in baptism the spots of sin are otherwise 
washed away than the filth of the body in a secular and 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 221 


carnal bath is, in which there is need of a seat to sit upon, 
of a vat to wash in, of soap and other such like imple- 
ments, that so the body may be washed and cleansed. 
But in another manner is the heart of a believer washed ; 
otherwise is the mind of a man purified by the merits 
of Christ. In the sacraments of salvation, through the 
indulgence of God in cases of necessity, the divine abridg- 
ments convey the whole to thdse that believe. Nor let 
any one think it strange that the sick, when they are bap- 
tized, are only perfused or sprinkled; since the Scripture 
says, by the prophet Ezekiel, chap. xxxvi, ver. 25, 26, ‘I 
will sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean; 
from all your filthinesses and from all your idols will I 
cleanse you; a new heart also will I give you, and a new 
spirit will I put within you.’ Also it is said in Numbers, 
chap. xix, ver. 19, 20, ‘ And the man which shall be un- 
clean to the evening, he shall be purified the third day, 
and the seventh day, and he shall be clean; but if he shall 
not be purified the third day, and the seventh day, he 
shall not be clean; and that soul shall be cut off from 
Israel, because the water of aspersion hath not been 
sprinkled on him.’ And again the Lord spake unto Mo- 
ses, Numbers viii, 6, '7, ‘Take the Levites from among 
the children of Israel, and cleanse them; and thus shalt 
thou do unto them to cleanse them, sprinkle water of pu- 
rifying uponthem.’ And again, ‘the water of aspersion is 
purification :’ from whence it appears, that sprinkling is 
sufficient instead of immersion; and whensoever it is 
done, if there be a sound faith of giver and receiver, it is 
perfect and complete.” 


And a little after, im the same epistle, the same father 
argues the validity of baptizing by sprinkling; because 
such as had been so baptized were never baptized again. 


Aut si aliquis existimat eos nihil consecutos, eo quod 


222 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


aqua salutari tantum perfusi sunt, sed imanes et vacuos 
esse; non decipiantur, et si incommodum languoris evase- 
rint et convaluerint, baptizentur. ‘Si autem baptizari non 
possunt, qui jam baptismo ecclesiastico sanctificati sunt, 
cur in fide sua et Domini indulgentia scandalizantur ? 
Epist. 76, § 10, p. 250. 


“Tf,” saith he, ‘any shall think that such have not ob- 
tained the grace of God, but are void and empty thereof, 
because they have been only perfused with the saving 
laver, let not such then that have been so baptized de- 
ceive themselves; but if they recover their health, let 
them be baptized ; but if they cannot be baptized, as hav- 
ing been already sanctified with the ecclesiastical bap- 
tism, why then are they scandalized in their faith and in 
the mercy of God 2?” 


So that sprinkling or perfusion was esteemed valid, and 
seems to be always used in cases of necessity, as immer- 
sion was in their ordinary public baptism: when, as Ter- 
tullian writes, “they dipped the baptized person three 
times under water,” that is, dipping him once at the nam- 
ing of each person of the Holy Trinity. ‘ Weare,” says 
the foresaid father, “dipped at the naming of each 
person.” 

§'7. When baptism was over, the person that had been 
then baptized, as Justin Martyr relates it, ‘ was received 
into the number of the faithful, who then sent up their 
public prayers to God for all men, for themselves, and for 
them that had been baptized.”* After which the baptized 


a'Ter mergitamur. De Coron. Milit. p. 336. 

» Nec semel, sed ter, ad singula nomina in Personas singulas tingi- 
mur. Advers. Prax. p. 229. 

© Huei d& usta TO otTwo Aovoar Tov TemELouévoy Kai ovyKaTaTe- 
Veiwevov eri TOG Aeyouévove adeAdove dyouev Eva ovvnynuévot eiol 
Kovac evyac ToLyoomevol UTEp TE EaVTOY Kai TOD dwTLOVEVTOE Kal GA- 
Awv ravraxot Tavtwv ebtévec. Apolog. 2, p. 97. 








THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 22a 


person, as the said father goes on to write, was admitted 
to receive the other sacrament of the Lord’s supper with 
the rest of the faithful. So that in Justin Martyr’s age, at 
least in his country, at that season, it seems very probable 
that there followed only prayers after baptism. But not 
long after his time, we meet with many other ceremonies 
then used, which, because they have some relation to our 
present controversies, I shall mention in the following 
chapter. 


CHAPTER V. 


§ 1. After baptism followed chrismation, or unction. § 2. Then sign- 
ation, or signing with the sign of the cross. §3. ‘Then imposition 
of hands, or confirmation. § 4. Their reasons for unction. 4 5. For 
signation. § 6. For imposition of hands. § 7. Confirmation imme- 
diately followed baptism. § 8. Presbyters confirmed as well as 
bishops. § 9. Confirmation reiterated. 


§ 1. As for those rites that succeeded baptism, and 
which we find first mentioned in Tertullian, they were in 
number three, viz., unction, signation, and imposition of 
hands ; or if the reader pleases, he may call them all by 
the name of confirmation. 

Touching unction, or chrismation, Tertullian thus 
writes: “ As soon as we are baptized we are anointed 
with the blessed unction an external carnal unction is 
poured upon us, but it spiritually advantages.”* And to 
the same purpose says his follower Cyprian, “ He that is 
baptized must of necessity be anointed, that having re- 





a Egressi de lavacro perungimur benedicta unctione in nobis car- 
naliter currit unctio, sed spiritualiter proficit. De Baptism. pp. 599, 600. 





224 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


ceived the chrism or unction, he may be the anointed of 
God, and have in him the grace of Christ.”+ 

§ 2. Under this chrismation was comprehended signa- 
tion, or the signing of the baptized person with the sign 
of the cross, which the minister performed with this oint- 
ment or chrism. So saith Tertullian: “The flesh is 
anointed, that the soul may be consecrated.” And then it 
follows, “The flesh is signed, that the soul may be forti- 
fied.”» ‘This sign was made in the forehead, as Cyprian 
observes, that king Uzzias, for invading the priest’s office, 
“was smit with a leprosy on his forehead, and marked, 
by an offended God, on that place where those are marked 
whom God receives.”*© Hence he calls a Christian’s 
forehead a “ signed forehead ;”4 and thus elegantly exhorts 
the people of Thibaris, in allusion hereunto, to take unto 
themselves the whole armour of God, mentioned Ephes. 
vi, 12; ‘To take unto themselves for a covering for their 
head, the helmet of salvation, that their ears might be for- 
tified against their persecutors’ edicts, that their eyes 
might be strengthened against the beholding of detestable 
images, that their forehead might be fortified, that so the 
sign of God might be kept inviolable.”* So Pontius speaks 


@ Ungi quoque necesse est eum qui baptizatus sit, ut accepto chris- 
mate, id est, unctione, esse unctus Dei, et habere in se gratiam Christi 
possit. Epist. 70, § 3, p. 211. 

» Caro ungitur, ut anima consecretur: caro signatur, ut et anima 
muniatur. De Resurrect. Carnis. 

° Lepr varietate in fronte maculatus est, ea parte corporis notatus 
offenso Domino, ubi signantur qui Dominum promerentur. De Unit. 
Eccles. § 16, p. 301. 

4 Frons cum signo. De Lapsis. § 1, p. 277. 

© Accipiamus quoque ad tegumentum capitis galeam salutarem, ut 
muniantur aures, ne audiant edicta feralia; muniantur oculi ne videant 
detestanda simulachra : muniatur frons ut signum Dei incolume serve- 
tur. Epist. 56, § 7, p. 156. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 225 


of certain confessors who, by the cruelty of their tor- 
mentors, “ had their foreheads marked a second time.”* 

It is observed by Tertullian, that the devil strives to be 
God’s ape, imitating the acts of his worship and service, 
and prescribing the same to his deluded adorers, as parti- 
cularly in the idolatrous services of Mithras, “ whose 
priests baptized some as his believing and faithful ser- 
vants, and signed them in their foreheads as his soldiers.” 

§ 3. To signation succeeded imposition of hands, or 
that which most properly we term confirmation, which 
was, the minister laid his hands on the head of the party 
baptized, anointed, and signed, and prayed that the Holy 
Ghost would be pleased to descend and rest upon him. 
This immediately followed signation, as that did unction. 
So saith Tertullian: “ The flesh is anointed that the soul 
may be consecrated ; the flesh is signed, that the soul may 
be fortified. The flesh is overshadowed with the imposi- 
tion of hands, that the soul may be enlightened by the 
Spirit.”*" And, “ When the unction is finished, then hands 
are imposed, with prayers invocating and inviting the 
Holy Spirit.’’4 

§ 4. Having thus briefly shown what their additional 
acts to baptism were, it will, in the next place, be neces- 
sary to inquire into the grounds or reasons of their usage 
of them: and, first, for unction: this was taken from the 


@ Confessores frontium notatarum secunda inscriptione signatos. In 
Vita Cypriani. 

b Tingit et ipse quosdam, utique credentes et fideles suos: expia- 
tionem delictorum de lavacro repromittit: et sic initiat Mithre, signat 
illic in frontibus milites suos. De Prescript. advers. Heret. p. 87. 

© Caro ungitur, ut anima consecretur; caro signatur, ut et anima 
muniatur; caro manus impositione adumbratur, ut et anima spiritu illu- 
minetur. De Resurrect. Carnis. p. 31. 

4 Dehine manus imponitur, per benedictionem advocans et invitans 
Spiritum Sanctum. De Baptism. p. 600. 

10* 


226 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


Jewish rites, where it was employed in the instalment 
of the high priest, to denote his sacerdotal consecration to 
the service of God, as Tertullian writes: “ This unction 
is according to the Jewish dispensation, wherein the high 
priest was anointed with oil out of a horn, as Aaron was 
by Moses.”* So now, in the times of the gospel, all 
Christians being, as Tertullian says, “ priests to God and 
the Father,” they were, in resemblance thereunto, conse- 
crated, by the anointing of oil, to their priesthood; or, as 
the foresaid father expresses it, “the flesh is anointed, 
that the soul may be consecrated.” 

From the spiritual unction also of God the Son, by God 
the Father, for which reason he was called Christ, or 
Anointed, they pleaded for their carnal and external unc- 
tion, as Tertullian saith: “Jesus is called Christ from 
being anointed, which unction was spiritual, because 
whilst only a spirit, he was anointed by the Father, as in 
the Acts, ‘ They are gathered together in this city against 
thy holy Son, whom thou hast anointed ;’ but our unction 
is carnal, though it spiritually profits.’’4 

Cyprian adds this farther reason for this custom of 
anointing, viz., “He that is baptized must of necessity 
receive the chrism or unction, that so he may be the 
anointed of God, and have in him the grace of Christ.”e 

§ 5. As for signation, or the signing with the sign of the 


2 De pristina disciplina, qua ungi oleo de cornu in sacerdotio sole- 
bant, ex quo Aaron a Moyse unctus est. De Baptism. p. 600. 

> Nonne et laici sacerdotes sumus? Scriptum est, regnum quoque 
nos et sacerdotes Deo et Patri suo fecit. Exhort. ad Castitat. p. 457. 

© Caro ungitur, ut anima consecretur. De Resurrect. Camis. p. 31. 

4 Christus dicitur 4 chrismate, quod est unctio, que Domino nomen 
accommodavit, facta spiritualis, quia Spiritus unctus est a Deo Patre, 
sicut in Actis: collecti sunt enimvero in ista civitate adversus sanctum 
fillum tuum quem unxisti: sic et in nobis carnaliter currit unctio, sed 
spiritualiter proficit. De Baptism. p. 600. 

* Ungi quoque necesse est eum, qui baptizatus sit, ut accepto chris- 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 229 


cross, by this was denoted, that they were to be strong 
and valiant in the cause of Christ, having their hearts 
fortified and strengthened, as Tertullian observes, “ the 
flesh is signed, that the soul may be fortified.”* Hence 
this sign was made on an open, visible place, on their 
foreheads, which is the seat of courage and confidence, 
implying thereby, that they ought courageously and con- 
stantly to fight like good soldiers under the cross of Christ ; 
whence Tertullian says, that as the Christians, so the 
priests of Mithras “ signed the foreheads of their soldiers.”» 

§ 6. As for the very act of confirmation, or imposition 
of hands, that was practised from an opinion of the imper- 
fections of baptism, that that did not convey the graces 
of the Holy Spirit, but only prepared persons for the re- 
ception of them, when they should be actually bestowed 
in the confirmation, for, as Tertullian says, ‘‘ We do not 
receive the Holy Ghost in baptism, but being purified 
therein by the angel,” (alluding to the angel that moved 
upon the pool at Bethesda,) “ we are prepared for the Holy 
Ghost.”« And, ‘ When our bodies are cleansed and blessed, 
then that most Holy Spirit willingly descends from the 
Father.”4 And, “ At the imposition of hands, the soul is 
illuminated by the Spirit.’ 

Cyprian, in his seventy-fourth epistle, § 6, 7, 8, dis- 
courses somewhat largely of this custom of confirmation ; 


mate, id est, unctione, esse unctus Del, et habere in se gratiam Christi 
possit. Epist. 70, § 3, p. 211. 

4 Caro signatur, ut anima muniatur. De Resurrect. Carnis. p. 31. 

> Signat illic in frontibus milites suos. De Prescript. advers. He- 
ret. p. 87. 

© Non quod in aquis Spiritum Sanctum consequamur, sed in aqua 
emundati ab angelo Spiritu Sancto preparamur. De Baptism. p. 599. 

‘Tune ille Sanctissimus Spiritus super emundata et benedicta corpora 
libens a Patre descendit. Ibid. p. 600. 

© Caro manus impositione adumbratur, ut et anima Spiritu illumine- 
tur. De Resurrect. Camis. p. 31. 


228 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


from whence I have observed this following account of 
it :—‘‘ Every one in a state of heathenism and idolatry was 
considered as dead: wherefore, when any one came from 
that state to the Christian faith, he was said to live; which 
life may be compared to a natural life. As to complete a 
natural life, there must be a body and a soul, so must the 
same be imagined in a spiritual life: as in the first crea- 
tion God first formed the body of man, and then breathed 
into him the breath of life; first made a fit subject to re- 
ceive the soul, before the soul itself was framed: so, in 
the second creation, God first prepares the man before he 
gives his Spirit; he first makes the man a fit temple for 
the Holy Ghost, before he gives the Holy Ghost. Now 
the way by which a man is prepared and fitted is by bap- 
tism, by which he is cleansed and purged from sin, and 
fitted for the reception of the Spirit of God, in which 
respect he is to be regarded as a body: the way by which 
the Holy Ghost is infused, which, as a living soul, must 
actuate and direct that prepared body, is by prayer and 
imposition of hands, or by confirmation.”* For, as Cyp- 
rian writes in the same place, “ Baptism alone cannot 
purge away sins, or sanctify a man, unless he has also the 
Holy Ghost.”’ That is, has received confirmation, as it 
is frequently styled in Cyprian’s epistles, in the decrees 
of the council of Carthage, and in the letter of Cornelius 
to Fabius, bishop of Antioch, extant in Eusebius, lib. 6, 
cap. 43, p. 244. This being the regeneration of the Spirit, 
and baptism the regeneration of water, both which our 


4 Non per manus impositionem quis nascitur, quando accipit Spiritum 
Sanctum, sed in baptismo, ut spiritum jam natus accipiat, sicut in pri- 
mo homine Adam factum est. Ante enim Deus eum plasmavit, et 
tunc insufHlavit in faciem ejus flatum vite ; nec enim potest accipi spi- 
ritus, nisi prius fuerit qui accipiat. § 8, p. 230. 

> Peccata enim purgare, et hominem sanctificare aqua sola non po- 
test, nisi habeat et Spiritum Sanctum. §7, p. 230. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 229 


Saviour affirmed to be necessary, when he said to Nico- 
demus, John ii, 5, “ Except a man be born of water, and 
of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.” 
As Nemesianus, bishop of Thubunis, saith, one is not suf- 
ficient without the other, “The Spirit cannot operate 
without water, nor the water without the Spirit.”* There- 
fore it was necessary to be “regenerated by both sacra- 
ments,” viz., by baptismand by confirmation. Wherefore, as 
Cyprian exhorts, we must pray, “ That those who are yet 
earthly, may become heavenly, and be born of the water 
and of the Spirit.”” That is, be baptized and confirmed, 
which were the external signs of cleansing from sin, and 
bestowing grace, both being necessary to make a complete 
Christian ; for, as the same father writes, “ Then are men 
truly sanctified, and fully become the sons of God, when 
they are regenerated with both sacraments, baptism and 
confirmation ; according as it is written, ‘ Except a man be 
born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the 
kingdom of God.’”* So that though a person was bap- 
tized, yet they accounted his Christianity incomplete and 
imperfect till he was also confirmed; for which reason 
Cornelius objects against Novatian, that he “could 
scarcely acknowledge him a complete Christian, because 
being baptized in his bed, he had not received confirm- 
ation, or the additionary rituals to baptism, nor did he ever 
after receive them.”¢ 

a Neque enim Spiritus sine aqua operari potest, neque aqua sine Spi- 
ritu utroque sacramento debere eos renasci in ecclesia catholica. 
Act. Concil. Carthag. apud Cyprian. p. 444. 

» Ut qui adhuc sunt prima nativitate terreni, incipiant esse ccelestes, 
ex aqua et Spiritu nati. De Orat. Dominic. § 12, p. 213. 

¢ Tunc enim demum plené sanctificari, et esse filli Dei possunt, si 
sacramento utroque nascantur; cum scriptum sit, nisi quis natus fuerit 
ex aqua et Spiritu, non potest introire in regnum Dei. Epist. 62, § 1, 
p- 216. 

4 Néow repimeoov yaderi) 








év GUTH TH KAivy H Exerto TEpixuvei¢ 


230 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


Thus you see the reasons they produced for this usage, 
to fortify which they added some examples of the Holy 
Writ, as Tertullian cites to this purpose the example of 
Jacob, in Genesis, “who put his hands on the heads of 
Ephraim and Manasses, and blessed them.”* And Cyp- 
rian urges that instance of the apostles, Acts vill, 15-17, 
where, after several of the Samaritans had been baptized 
by Philip, Peter and James conferred the Holy Ghost on 
them by imposition of hands, “ They had no need again to 
be baptized,” saith he, “having been baptized by Philip, 
but only what was wanting, or lacking, was performed by 
Peter and John, which was, that by prayer and imposi- 
tion of hands, the Holy Ghost should be conferred on 
them, which custom,” as he there adds, “ is now observed 
by us, that those who are baptized in the church, are 
offered to the governors thereof, by whose prayers, and 
imposition of hands, they receive the Holy Ghost, and are 
completed with the Lord’s seal.”» To this practice also 
Firmilian refers that action of St. Paul in Acts xix, 5, 
“Where on those who had been only baptized by John’s 
baptism, he conferred the Holy Ghost by imposition of 
EdaBev, elye ypn Aéyelv Tov ToLodTOp EiAndéval, ob UNV OVE TOV AoLTOV 
Eruye OvadvyOv THY véooVv, OY ypy wETAaUBavey KATA TOV THE EKKAN- 
oia¢g Kavova, Tob Tecdpaytodjvar brO TOD éxicKdmov. Epist. ad Fab. 
Antioch. Euseb. lib. 6, cap. 43, p. 244. 

a Est hoc quoque de veteri instrumento quo nepotes suos ex Joseph 
Efrem et Manassem, Jacob capitibus impositis et intermutatis manibus 
benedixerit. De Baptism. p. 600. 

> Quia legitimum et ecclesiasticum baptismum consecuti fuerant, 
baptizari eos ultra non oportebat: sed tantummodo quod deerat, id a 
Petro et Johanne factum est, ut oratione pro eis habita, et manu impo- 
sita, invocaretur et infunderetur super eos Spiritus Sanctus. Quod 
nunc quoque apud nos geritur, ut qui in ecclesia baptizantur, prepositis 
ecclesie offerantur: et per nostram orationem ac mantis impositionem 


Spiritum Sanctum consequantur, et signaculo dominico consummentur. 
Epist. 73, § 8, p. 220. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 231 


hands.”* And Cyprian applies to confirmation the descent 
of the Holy Ghost, Acts x, 44, “in miraculous operations 
and gifts of tongues on Cornelius and his friends, though 
they were not then baptized.”® 

So much now for the reasons of confirmation; all that 
I shall do more is to add two or three observations con- 
cerning it. 

§ 7. The first whereof is, that confirmation was an im- 
mediate consequence of baptism; it was not deferred till 
many years after, but was presently administered, as Ter- 
tullian writes: ‘“‘ As soon as we come out of the baptismal 
laver, we are anointed, and then we are confirmed.’”* Else, 
if they had not been so soon confirmed, they must, not- 
withstanding their baptism, according to their opinions, 
as it hath been before demonstrated, have continued 
graceless, without the adorning gifts of the Holy Spirit, a 
long time, even as long as their confirmation was delayed, 
which to imagine concerning them is unreasonable and 
uncharitable. 

Indeed, in case of necessity, when they had neither 
time nor conveniency, it was waived, as immersion was 
with respect to baptism; but yet if the sick person hap- 
pened to recover, he was then to be confirmed, as is evi- 
dent from the case of Novatian, whom Cornelius accuses, 
because “that when he was restored to his health again, 
he was not confirmed according to the canon of the 

4 Eos qui ab Johanne baptizati fuerint, priusquam missus esset 4 Do- 
mino Spiritus Sanctus, baptizavit denuo spirituali baptismo, et sic eis 
manum imposuit, ut acciperent Spiritum Sanctum. Apud Cyprian. 
Epist. 75, § 7, p. 237. 

> Invenimus hoc esse ab apostolis custoditum, ut in domo Cornelii 
centurionis super ethnicos qui illic aderant, fidei calore ferventes, des- 
cendisset Spiritus Sanctus, &c. Epist. 75, § 1, p. 216. 

¢ Egressi de lavacro perungimur benedicta unctione 
nus imponitur. De Baptism. pp. 599, 600. 


dehinc ma- 





232 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


church.”* But otherwise confirmation immediately, or at 
the same time, followed baptism. 

§ 8. From the former observation there follows this, 
that not only the bishop, but also his presbyters or curates 
did, by his permission, and, in his absence, confirm: for, 
if confirmation always succeeded baptism, then whenever 
baptism was, there was also confirmation. Now as for 
baptism, we may reasonably suppose, that in a church 
there were some fit to be baptized at least once a year ; 
and sometimes it might happen that either the see was 
vacant, or the bishop, through persecution, might be absent 
from his flock so long a time ; as Cyprian was double the 
space; and if so, must no persons have been baptized 
within that time by reason of the bishop’s unavoidable 
absence? That seems a little hard, since, as was said 
before, they esteemed baptism and confirmation necessary 
to salvation, and to deprive those souls of salvation that 
died within that time, because they had not been confirmed 
by the bishop, which was impossible, would be too severe 
and uncharitable. 

Besides, that presbyters did baptize, we have proved 
already ; and since confirmation was done at the same 
time with baptism, it is very reasonable to conclude that 
he that did the one performed the other also. 

But that presbyters did confirm will appear most evi- 
dently from this very consideration, viz., that the imposi- 
tion of hands on persons just after baptism, which we call 
confirmation, and the imposition of hands at the restitution 
of offenders, which we call absolution, was one and the 
self-same thing, confirmation and absolution being only 
terms that we make use of to distinguish the different 
times of the performances of the same ceremony. The 

2 Od unv ob0é TV Aoi EtvxE SLadvyav THY voooy, OV YpH meTA- 
AauBavev Kata Tov THe EKKAnoiag Kavova, TOD TE odpaytadHvaL UT 
Tot emioxorov. Apud Euseb. lib. 6, cap. 43, p. 244. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 233 


thing or ceremony was not different: imposition of hands 
was used both at one and the other, denoting the same 
mystical signification, viz., the conferring of the Holy 
Ghost and his graces on that person on whom hands were 
imposed: only now to distinguish the time of this imposi- 
tion of hands, whether after baptism, or at the reconcilia- 
tion of offenders, these two terms of confirmation and 
absolution are used by us, the former to signify that used 
just after baptism, and the latter that that was employed at 
the restitution of penitents. 

This now, viz., that confirmation and absolution were 
one and the self-same thing, I shall presently prove. And 
then, in the next place, I shall show, that with the bishop, 
and sometimes without the bishop, presbyters did absolve 
by imposition of hands. And if these two poimts can be 
clearly manifested, it will evidently follow that presbyters 
did confirm; for if there was no difference between con- 
firmation and absolution, but only with respect to time; 
and if presbyters at one time, viz., at absolution, conferred 
the Holy Ghost by imposition of hands, it is very unrea- 
sonable to deprive them of the same power at the other 
time, which was at confirmation. If presbyters could at 
one season bestow the Holy Spirit, it is very probable that 
they could do the same at the other also. 

Now as to the first point, viz., that there was no difference 
between confirmation and absolution, but that they were 
one and the same thing, this will appear most evidently 
from the consideration of that famous controversy touching 
the validity of heretics’ baptism, between Stephen, bishop 
of Rome, and Cyprian, bishop of Carthage; or rather 
between the churches of Europe and Africa, the sum 
whereof was this: Stephen, bishop of Rome, asserted that 
those who were baptized by heretics, and came over to 
the catholic church, should be received only by imposition 
of hands. Cyprian, bishop of Carthage, contended that, 


234 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


besides imposition of hands, they should also be baptized, 
unless that they had been before baptized by the orthodox, 
in which case imposition of hands should be esteemed 
sufficient. Now this imposition of hands they sometimes 
term that which we call confirmation, and sometimes 
absolution, promiscuously using either of those expres- 
sions, and indifferently applying them according as they 
pleased, in one place giving it the title of confirmation, 
and in another that of absolution, which that they did, I 
shall endeavour to evince by showing,— 

First, That they called this imposition of hands con- 
firmation. 

Secondly, That they called it absolution. 

First. I shall prove that they called it confirmation ; 
unto which end let us consider these following passages : 
“Those,” says Cyprian, “ which are baptized without the 
church, when they come unto us, and unto the church, 
which is but one, they are to be baptized, because the 
imposition of hands by confirmation is not sufficient with- 
out baptism, for then they are fully sanctified, and become 
the sons of God, when they are born with both sacra- 
ments, according as it is written, ‘ Unless a man be born 
again of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the 
kingdom of God.’”+ 'To the same effect says Nemesia- 
nus, bishop of Thubunis, ‘Those do greatly err who affirm 
that they ought only to be confirmed by imposition of 
hands, and so to be received, since it is manifest they 
must be regenerated with both sacraments in the catholic 

4 Eos qui sint foris extra ecclesiam tincti quando ad nos, atque 
ad ecclesiam que una est, venerint, baptizari oportere, eo quod parim 
sit els manum imponere ad accipiendum Spiritum Sanctum, nisi acci- 
piant et ecclesia baptismum. 'Tunc enim demum plené sanctificari et 
esse fil Dei possunt, si sacramento utroque nascantur, cum scriptum 


sit, nisi quis natus fuerit ex aqua et Spiritu, non potest introire in reg- 
num Dei. Epist. 72, § 1, p. 216. 





THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 235 


church.”* And Secundinus, bishop of Carpis, determined, 
that “on heretics, who are the seed of antichrist, the Holy 
Ghost cannot be conferred by imposition of hands alone in 
confirmation.” » 

Stephen pleaded on his side, “ That the very name of 
Christ was so advantageous to faith and the sanctification 
of baptism, that in what place soever any one was bap- 
tized in that name, he immediately obtained the grace of 
Christ.” But unto this Firmilian briefly replies, “ That 
if the baptism of heretics, because done in the name of 
Christ, was sufficient to purge away sins, why was not 
confirmation, that was performed in the name of the same 
Christ, sufficient to bestow the Holy Ghost too?”* And, 
therefore, it is thus eagerly argued by Cyprian, ‘‘ Why do 
they,” saith he, (meaning Stephen and his party, who re- 
ceived heretics by imposition of hands only,) “ patronize 
heretics and schismatics? Let them answer us; have 
they the Holy Ghost, or have they not? If they have, 
why then do they lay hands on those that are baptized by 
them, when they come over to us to bestow on them the 
Holy Ghost, when they had received him before ; for if he 


4 Male sibi quidam interpretantur, ut dicant, quod per mantis imposi- 
tionem Spiritum Sanctum accipiant, et sic recipiantur, cum manifestum 
sit utroque sacramento debere eos renasci in ecclesia catholica. Act. 
Concil. Carthag. apud Cyprian. p. 444. 

> Super filios alienos, et soboles Antichristi Spiritum Sanctum per ma- 
nus impositionem tantummodo non posse descendere. Act. Concil. 
Carthag. apud Cyprian. p. 446. 

¢ Sed in multum, inquit, proficit nomen Christi ad fidem et baptismi 
sanctificationem, ut quicunque et ubicunque in nomine Christi baptiza- 
tus fuerit, consequatur statim gratiam Christi, quando huic loco breviter 
occurri possit, et dici, quoniam si in nomine Christi valuit foris baptis- 
ma ad hominem purgandum, in ejusdem Christi nomine valere illic po- 
tuit et mantis impositio ad accipiendum Spiritum Sanctum. Apud 
Cyprian. Epist. 75, § 16, p. 240. 


236° THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


was there, they could confer him? But if heretics and 
schismatics have not the Spirit of God, and, therefore, we 
lay hands on them in confirmation, that they may here 
receive what heretics neither have nor can give; it is 
manifest, that since they have not the Holy Ghost, they 
cannot give remission of sins ;”* that is, since they cannot 
confirm, therefore they cannot baptize. So that from these 
and some other passages,” which, to avoid tediousness, I 
omit, it is clear that both Stephen and Cyprian understood, 
by imposition of hands, that which we now call con- 
firmation. 

Secondly. I now come to show that they also termed it 
absolution, as will appear from these following instances: 
—‘‘ They,” says Cyprian, meaning Stephen and his fol- 
lowers, “urge, that in what they do, they follow the old 
custom that was used by the ancients, when heresies and 
schisms first began, when those that went over to them 
first were in the church, and baptized therein ; who, when 
they returned again to the church, and did penance, were 
not forced to be baptized. But this,” says he, “ makes 
nothing against us, for we now observe the very same. 
Those who were baptized here, and from us went over to 
the heretics, if afterward, being sensible of their error, 
they return to the church, we only absolve them by the 


2 Qui hereticis sive schismaticis patrocinantur, respondeant nobis 
habeantne Spiritum Sanctum, an non habeant? Si habent, cur illic 
baptizatis, quando ad nos veniunt, manus imponitur ad accipiendum 
Spiritum Sanctum, cum jam utique illic acceptus sit, ubi si fuit, dari 
potuit? Si autem foris cuncti heretici et schismatici non habent Spi- 
ritum Sanctum, et ideo apud nos manus imponitur, ut hic accipiatur, 
quod illic nec est, nec dari potest: manifestum est nec remissionem 
peccatorum dari per eos posse, quos constet Spiritum Sanctum non ha- 
bere. Epist. 76, § 8, p. 249. 

> Cyprian. Epist. 73, § 8, p. 220, & § 19, p. 224. Epist. 74, § 6, 7, 
8, p. 230. Firmilian apud Cyprian. Epist. 75, § 7, p. 237, & $11, 
p. 249. 


——.— 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 2oF 


imposition of hands; because once they were sheep, and 
as wandering and straying sheep the shepherd receives 
them into his flock; but if those that come from heretics 
were not first baptized in the church, they are to be bap- 
tized, that they may become sheep; for there is but one 
holy water in the church that makes sheep.” 

But that this imposition of hands was the same with 
absokition, will most evidently appear from the opinion or 
determination of Stephen, and from Cyprian’s answer there- 
unto. 

Stephen’s opinion or determination was, “If any shall 
from any heresy come unto us, let nothing be innovated 
or introduced besides the old tradition; which is, that 
hands be imposed on him as a penitent.” Now, unto that 
part of this decree which asserts the reception of heretics 
only by absolution, or the imposition of hands in penance 
to be a tradition descended down from their predecessors, 
Cyprian replies, “That he would observe it as a divine 
and holy tradition, if it were .either commanded in the 
gospel and the epistles of the apostles, or contained in the 
Acts, that those who came from heretics should not be 
baptized, but only hands imposed on them for penance, or 


2 Et dicunt se in hoc veterem consuetudinem sequi, quando apud ve- 
teres hereseos, et schismatum prima adhuc fuerint initia, ut hi illic es- 
sent, qui de ecclesia recedebant, et hic baptizati prius fuerant : quos ta- 
men ad ecclesiam revertentes, et pcenitentiam agentes, necesse non 
erat baptizare, quod nos quoque hodie observamus, ut quos constet hic 
baptizatos esse, et 4 nobis ad hereticos transisse, si postmodum peccato 
suo cognito et errore digesto, ad veritatem et matricem redeant, satis 
sit in peenitentiam manumimponere : ut quia ovis jam fuerat, hanc ovem 
abalienatam eterrabundam in ovile suum pastor recipiat. Si autem qui 
ab hereticis venit, baptizatus in ecclesia prius non fuit, sed alienus in 
totum et profanus venit: baptizandus est, ut ovis fiat, quia una est aqua 
in ecclesia sancta que oves faciat. Epist.71, § 2, p. 214. 

> Si quis ergo a quacunque heresi venerit ad nos, nihil innovetur, nisi 
quod traditum est, ut manus illi imponatur in poenitentiam. Apud 
Cyprian. Epist. 74, § 1, p. 229. 


238 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


as penitents;’* but that for his part, “he never found it 
either commanded or written, that on a heretic hands 
should be only imposed for penance, and so he should 
be admitted to communion.”® Wherefore he on his side 
concludes and determines, ‘ Let it, therefore, be observed 
and held by us, that all who from any heresy are converted 
to the church, be baptized with the one lawful baptism of 
the church; except those who were formerly baptized in 
the church, who, when they return, are to be received by 
the alone imposition of hands, after penance, into the flock, 
from whence they have strayed.”* 

So that these instances do as clearly prove, that they 
meant by their imposition of hands absolution, as the 
former instances do that they meant confirmation ; and 
both of them together plainly show and evidence confirm- 
ation and absolution to be the very self-same thing; for 
since they promiscuously used, and indifferently applied 
these terms, and that very thing, which in some places 
they express by confirmation, in others they call abso- 
lution, it necessarily follows that there can be no essential 
or specifical difference between them, but that they are 
of a like numerical identity or sameness. But, 

Secondly, I now come inthe next place to demonstrate 


@ Si ergo aut in evangelio precipitur, aut in apostolorum epistolis, 
aut Actibus continetur, ut 4 quacunque heresi venientes non baptizen- 
tur, sed tantum manus illis imponatur in penitentiam, observetur hec 
divina et sancta traditio. Apud Cyprian. Epist. 74, § 2, p. 229. 

b Retro nusquam omnino preceptum est, neque conscriptum, ut he- 
retico tantum manus In peenitentiam imponatur, et sic ei communice- 
tur. Ibid. § 4, p. 229. 

© Observetur itaque a nobis et teneatur—ut omnes qui ex quacunque 
heresi ad ecclesiam convertuntur, ecclesiz unico legitimo baptismo 
baptizentur, exceptis his qui baptizati in ecclesia prius fuerant, et sic ad 
hereticos transierant: hos enim oportet, cum redeant, acta peenitentid 
per mantis impositionem solam recipi; et in ovile, unde erraverant, 4 
pastore restitul. Ibidem. § 16. p. 232. ; 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 239 


that, together with the bishop, and sometimes without the 
bishop, presbyters did absolve by imposition of hands ; 
that they did it, together with the bishop, several places 
of Cyprian abundantly prove. ‘“ Offenders,” saith he, 
“receive the right of communion by the imposition of 
hands of the bishop and of his clergy.”* And, “No 
criminal can be admitted to communion, unless the bishop 
and clergy have imposed hands on him.”» And that some- 
times they did it without the bishop, (always understand- 
ing his leave and permission,) is apparent from the exam- 
ple of Serapion, who, being out of the church’s peace, 
and approaching the hour of dissolution, “ sent for one of 
the presbyters to absolve him, which the presbyter did, 
according to the order of the bishop, who had before given 
his permission unto the presbyters to absolve those who 
were in danger of death.”* And as the bishop of Alex- 
andria gave his presbyters this power, so likewise did 
Cyprian, bishop of Carthage, who, when he was in exile, 
ordered his clergy “to confess and absolve, by imposition 
of hands, those who were in danger of death.”4 And, “if 
any were in such condition, they should not expect his 
presence, but betake themselves to the first presbyter they 
could find, who should receive their confession and ab- 
solve them by imposition of hands.”* So that it is evident 


a Per impositionem manus episcopi et cleri jus communicationis acci- 
piunt. Epist. 10, § 2, p. 30. 

b Nec ad communicationem venire quis possit, nisi prius illi et ab 
episcopo et clero manus fuit imposita. Epist. 12, § 1, p. 37. 

© Tév mpeoButépwv poor Tiva KdAnoov évToAne O& bn’ éuod dedo- 
pévne, Tove araAAatTouévove Tod Biov, ei déoLVTO, Kai wddica et Kat 
mpotepov ikeretoartec Tbyolev, Adiecda, lv’ evéAnideg GnadAdTTuv- 
tat. Ex Epist. Alexand. apud Euseb. lib. 6, cap. 44, p. 246. 

4 Si premi infirmitate aliqua et periculo ceeperint, exomologesi facta, 
et manu eis 4 vobis in peenitentiam imposita. Epist. 14, § 1, p. 41. 

€ Si incommodo aliquo et infirmitatis periculo occupati fuerint, non 
expectata presentia nostra apud presbyterum quemcunque presentem 





240 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


that presbyters, even without the bishop, did absolve of- 
fenders, and formally receive them into the church’s 
peace by imposition of hands. 

Now then, if the imposition of hands on persons just 
after baptism, and the imposition of hands at the restitu- 
tion of offenders, was one and the self-same thing; and 
if presbyters had power and authority to perform the latter, 
I see no reason why we should abridge them of the former : 
both the one and the other was confirmation ; andif pres- 
byters could confirm at one time, why should we doubt 
of their right and ability to perform it another time? If it 
was lawful for them to impose hands on one occasion, it 
was as lawful for them to do it on another. 

§ 9. From the precedent observation of the identity of 
that which we now distinguish by the names _ of confirm- 
ation and absolution, it necessarily results that confirm- 
ation was not, like baptism, only once performed, but on 
many persons frequently reiterated. All persons after 
baptism were confirmed ; that is, by the imposition of 
hands and prayer, the Holy Ghost was beseeched to de- 
scend upon them, and so to fortify them by his heavenly 
grace, as that they might courageously persevere in their 
Christian warfare to their lives’ end; but if it should so 
happen, as oftentimes it did, that any so confirmed should 
fall from the Christian faith, and be for a time excluded the 
church’s peace, when they were again admitted, hands 
were again imposed on them, and the Holy Spirit again 
invocated, to strengthen them with his almighty grace, by 
which they might be upheld to the day of salvation; and 
so often as any man fell, and was restored to the church’s 
communion, so often was he confirmed, and the Holy 
Ghost entreated more firmly to establish and settle him. 





Exomologesin facere delicti sui possint ; ut manu eis in peeniten- 
tiam imposita, veniant ad Dominum cum pace. Epist. 13, § 1, p. 39. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 241 


CHAPTER VI. 


§ 1. Of the Lord’s supper. The time when administered. § 2. Persons 
that received it. None present at the celebration thereof besides the 
communicants. §3. The manner of its celebration. In some places 
the communicants first made their offermgs. § 4. The minister began 
with a sacramental discourse, or exhortation: then followed a prayer, 
consisting of petitions and praises, which consecrated both the ele- 
ments at once. § 5. After that the words of the institution were 
read. §6. Then the bread was broken, and the wine poured out, 
and both distributed. Diversity of customs in the manner of the dis- 
tribution. § 7. The posture of receiving. § 8. After they had com- 
municated, they sung a psalm, and then concluded with prayer, and a 
collection for the poor. 


§ 1. Tue first of the Christian sacraments having been 
so largely discussed, I now come to treat of the other, viz., 
The Lord’s supper: in the handling of which I shall in- 
quire into these three things: 1. The time. 2. The per- 
son. And, 3. The manner thereof. 

First. As for the time of the celebration. In general, 
it was at the conclusion of their solemn services, as Justin 
Martyr writes, “That after they had read, sung, preached, 
and prayed, then they proceeded to the administration of 
the eucharist.”* But as for the particular part of the day, 
that seems to have been according to. the circumstances 
and customs of every church. In Tertullian’s age and 
country they received it “at supper time ;”* from which 
late assembling, it is probable, that the heathens took oc- 
casion to accuse them of putting out of lights, and promis- 
cuously mingling one with another. Which accusation 
may be read at large in Justin Martyr’s dialogue with 
Tryphon, in Minutius Felix, and the apologies of 'Tertul- 
lian and Athenagoras. But whether this was then their 


@ Apolog. 2, p. 27. > In tempore victtis. De Coron. Milit, p. 337. 
1] 


242 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


constant scason in times of peace, I know not; this is 
certain, that in times of persecution they laid hold on any 
season or opportunity for the enjoying of this sacred ordi- 
nance: whence Tertullian tells us of their “ receiving the 
eucharist in their antelucan assemblies, or, in their assem- 
blies before day.”* And Pliny reports, that in his time 
the Christians “‘ were wont to meet together before it was 
light, and to bind themselves by a sacrament.” 

Cyprian writes that in his days “they administered 
this sacrament both morning and evening.”« And, “ That 
as Christ administered the sacrament in the evening, to 
signify the evening and end of the world, so they cele- 
brated it in the morning, to denote the resnrrection of their 
Lord and Master.’’¢ 

All that can be gathered from hence is, that they did 
not deem any particular part of the day necessary to the 
essence of the sacrament, but every church regulated 
itself herein according to the diversity of its customs and 
circumstances. 

§ 2. As for the persons communicating, they were not 
indifferently all that professed the Christian faith, as Ori- 
gen writes: ‘“ It doth not belong to every one to eat of 
this bread, and to drink of this cup.”* But they were only 
such as were in the number of the faithful, “‘ such as were 
baptized, and received both the credentials and practicals 


2 Eucharistie sacramentum etiam antelucanis ccetibus. De Coron. 
Milit. p. 338. 

> Ante lucem convenire 
ad Trajan. 

¢ In matutinis sacrificiis cum ad coenandum venimus, mixtum ca- 
licem offerimus. Epist. 63, § 12, p. 177. 

4 Christum offerre oportebat circa vesperam diei, ut hora ipsa sacri- 
ficii ostenderet occasum et vesperam mundi Nos autem resurrec- 
tionem Domini mane celebramus. Ibidem. 





seque sacramento obstringere. Epist. 








© Ob ravti KadjKet uy YpHOVaL TO ApTH, Kat uy TivEery EK TOU TOTY- 
piov. Com. in Joan. vol. 2, tom. 28, p. 345. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 243 


of Christianity.”* That is, who believed the articles of the 
Christian faith, and led a holy and a pious life. Such as 
these, and none else, were permitted to communicate. 

Now since none but the faithful were admitted, it fol- 
lows that the catechumens and the penitents were ex- 
cluded; the catechumens, because they were not yet 
baptized, for baptism always preceded the Lord’s supper, 
as Justin Martyr says, “It is not lawful for any one to 
partake of the sacramental food, except he be baptized ;”» 
the penitents, because for their sins they were cast out 
of the church, and whilst excluded from the peace thereof, 
they could not participate of the marks and tokens of that 
peace, but were to be driven therefrom, and not admitted 
thereto, “till they had fully satisfied for their faults, lest 
otherwise they should profane the body of the Lord, and 
drink his cup unworthily, and so be guilty of the body and 
blood of the Lord.”: 

Hence, when the other parts of divine worship were 
ended, and the celebration of the eucharist was to begin, 
the catechumens, penitents, and all, except the commu- 
nicants, were to depart, as Tertullian says thereof, “‘ Pious 
initiations drive away the profane.”4 These being mys- 
teries which were to be kept secret and concealed from 
all, except the faithful; inasmuch as to others the very 
method and manner of their actions herein were unknown, 


4H rpooy airy kaheira rap’ yuiv ebyapisia——i¢ oddevi GAAwW jue- 
raoyeiv é&é6v ecw, TO TiceborTe GAnd7 elvat Ta dedidaypéva bp’ HUGY, 
Kal Aovoauévy TO drép ddécewe dpapTLOv, Kal ei¢ dvayévvnaty AovTpor, 
kai obTw¢ BiodvTt, Oc 6 Xpicd¢ rapédwxev. Just. Martyr. Apol. 2, p. 97. 

> "He obdevi GAAw petacyeiv eov ecw 7 Aovoapévy TO bTrep Agé- 
céwe duapTiov Kai sic dvayévvyow Aovtpév. Apolog. 2, pp. 97, 98. 

¢ Ante actam peenitentiam offerre lapsis pacem, et eucharistiam 
dare, id est, sanctum Domini corpus profanare audeant, cum scriptum 
sit; qui ederit panem, aut biberit calicem Domini indigné, reus erit 
corporis et sanguinis Christi. Cyprian. Epist. 11, § 1, p. 32. 

4 Piz initiationes arceant profanos. Apolog. cap. 7, p. 674. 








244 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


which was observed by the pagans, who objected to the 
Christians the secrecy of their mysteries: which charge 
Tertullian does not deny, but confessing it, answers, 
“ That that was the very nature of mysteries to be con- 
cealed, as Ceres’s were in Samothracia.”* 

§ 3. The catechumens with others being gone out, and 
none remaining but the faithful, the celebration of the eu- 
charist next followed; which brings me to the inquiry of 
the third thing, viz., The manner of the celebration thereof. 
But before I meddle therewith, I shall briefly premise this 
observation, viz., That in some places, as in France and 
Africa, the communicants first made their offerings, pre- 
senting, according to their ability, bread, or wine, or the 
like, as the first fruits of their increase. “It being our 
duty,” as Ireneus writes, “to offer unto God the first 
fruits of his creatures, as Moses saith, ‘Thou shalt not 
appear empty before the Lord.’”» “ Notas if God wanted 
these things, but to show our fruitfulness and gratitude 
unto him.”* Wherefore Cyprian thus severely blamed 
the rich matrons for their scanty oblation: “Thou art rich 
and wealthy,” saith he, ‘“‘ and dost thou think duly to cele- 
brate the Lord’s supper, when thou refusest to give? Thou 
who comest to the sacrament without a sacrifice, what 
part canst thou have from the sacrifice which the poor 
offer up?”4 


a Ex forma omnibus mysteriis silentii fides adhibeatur. Samothracia 
et Eleusinia reticentur. Apolog. cap. 7, p. 674. 

b Offerre igitur oportet Deo primitias ejus creature, sicut et Moyses 
ait, non apparebis vacuus ante conspectum Domini Dei tui. Lib. 4, 
cap. 34, p. 262. 

¢ Non quasi indigenti, sed ut ipsi nec infructuosi nec ingrati sint. 
Lib. 4, cap. 32, p. 261. 

4 Locuples et dives es, et Dominicum celebrare te credis, que corbo- 
nam omnino non respicist Que in Dominicum sine sacrificio venis, 
que partem de sacrificio quod pauper obtulit, sumist De Opere et 
Eleemos. § 14, p. 354. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 245 


These offerings were employed to the relief of the poor, 
and other uses of the church; and it seems probable that 
a suflicient quantity of that bread and wine was presented 
to the bishop, or to him that officiated, to be employed for 
the sacramental elements, whose consecration next suc- 
ceeded, which, in the main, was after the following 
manner :— 

§ 4. It is very likely that in many places the minister 
first began with an exhortation or discourse touching the 
nature and end of that sacrament which the congregation 
were going to partake of, that so their hearts might be the 
more elevated and raised into heavenly frames and dispo- 
sitions. This may be gathered from the history of an 
exorcist woman, related by Firmilian, who took upon her 
to perform many ecclesiastical administrations, as to bap- 
tize and celebrate the Lord’s supper, which last she did 
“ without the wonted sermon, or discourse ;”* which seems 
to intimate, that in those days it was customary in Lesser 
Asia, and perhaps at Carthage too, for the minister to 
make a speech or exhortation before the participation of 
the sacrament. But whether this practice was universal, 
or more ancient than Firmilian, I cannot determine ; this 
that follows was, viz., a prayer over the elements by him 
that officiated, unto which the people gave their assent by 
saying, Amen. This prayer is thus described by Justin 
Martyr: “ Bread and wine are offered to the minister, 
who, receiving them, gives praise and glory to the Lord 
of all through the Son, and the Holy Ghost, and in a large 
manner renders particular thanks for the present mercies; 
who when he hath ended his prayers and praise, all the 
people say, Amen.”® And, ‘‘ When the minister had thus 


a Sine sacramento solite predicationis. Apud Cyprian. Epist. 75, 
§ 10, p. 238. 

b TIpoodépetat TH Tpoecte THY adEAdGy aproc, Kai woTHpLov bdaTog, 
kal Kpduatoc, Kai ovtog AaBav alvov Kai dogav 7 Ilatpi rov bAwv 


246 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


given thanks, and the people said, Amen, the deacons dis- 
tributed the elements.”* And again, “ Bread and wine 
are offered to the minister, who to the utmost of his abil- 
ities sends up prayers and praises, and the people say, 
Amen, and then the consecrated elements are distri- 
buted.’”» 

From this description, by Justin Martyr, of the sacra- 
mental prayer we may observe these few things pertinent 
to the matter in hand :— 

I. That there was but one long prayer antecedent to 
the distribution of the elements: for he says, “ That the 
minister having received the bread and wine, he offered 
up prayers and praise unto God in a large manner; and 
when he had ended, the people said, Amen.” 

II. That this long prayer consisted of two parts, viz., 
evyac, and ebyapiciac, as he calls them, that is, petition and 
thanksgiving ; in the former they prayed for the peace of 
the church, the quiet of the world, the health of the em- 
perors, and, in a word, for all men that needed their 
prayers, as it is represented by Tertullian: “ We pray, 
saith he, “for the emperors, for all that are in authority 
under them, for the state of the world, for the quiet of 
affairs, and for the delay of the day of judgment.”* In the 
latter they gave God thanks for sending Christ, and for 


Oa Tod dvéuatoc TOD Yiod Kai rod Ivetuaroc tod ‘Ayiov avaréuret, 
kal evyapiciav brep Tod KaTasiGoVa TobTwY Tap’ adTod Eni TOAD Tole 
ital ov ovvTeAécaytoe Tac Edyac Kal THY ebyapiciav, Ta 6 TapOY Aad¢ 
érevonuet Aéywv, ’Aunv. Apolog. 2, p. 97. 

a Kiyapicjoavtog dé Tod mpoecGtoc, Kai érevdnunoavtTog mavToc 
Tov Aaod, didkovol, &c. Ibid. 

b”Aptoc mpoogépetat Kai olvoc Kai bdwp, Kai 6 TpoECuC Evyag Ouoi- 
we Kat evyapiciac bon Sbvautc avT@ avaréuret, Kai 6 Aade erevonuel 
Aéywv, TO Auny, Kal 7 diddooe Kai H meTaAnie and THY edyapicnBév- 
Tav éxdcw yiveta. Ibid. p. 98. 

© Oramus pro imperatoribus, pro ministris eorum ac potestatibus, pro 
statu seculi, pro rerum quiete, pro mora finis. Apolog. cap. 39, p. 709. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 247 


the institution of that comfortable sacrament, desiring his 
blessing on, and consecration of, the elements then before 
them. 

Ill. That by this one prayer both the elements were 
consecrated at once; for he says, “ The minister took both 
elements together, and blessed them, and then they were 
distributed.” He did not consecrate them distinctly, but 
both together. 

§ 5. After prayer was ended, they read the words of 
institution, that so the elements might be consecrated by 
the word, as well as by prayer. Whence Origen calls the 
sacramental elements, “the food that is sanctified by the 
word of God and prayer.” And “that is hallowed by 
the word of God and prayer.”* And Irenezus writes, 
‘“‘ That when the bread and wine receive the word of God, 
then it becomes the eucharist of the body and blood of 
Christ.” 

§ 6. The elements being thus consecrated, the minister 
took the bread, and brake it—“ the bread which we break,” 
or, “the broken bread,”* as it is styled by Irenzus, and 
then gave it to the deacons, who distributed it to the com- 
municants, and after that the cup, which the deacons in 
the like manner delivered. So it was in Justin Martyr’s 
time and country. “The elements,” saith he, “being 
blessed, the deacons give to every one present of the con- 
secrated bread and wine.”¢ But in Tertullian’s time and 
country, the minister, and not the deacons, distributed the 





a Tod dytacdévtoc Adyw Oeod Kai evTedser UpTov TO dylalouevov 
Bpaua Oia Adyov Ocod Kai évtevSewe. Com. in Matth. vol. 1, 254. 

> Quando mixtus calix et fractus panis percipit verbum Dei, fit eu- 
charistia sanguinis et corporis Christi. Lib. 5, cap. 4, p. 318. 

¢ Panis quem frangimus fractus panis. Lib. 5, cap. 4, p. 318. 

4 Kiyapicncavtoc dé tod mpoecGroc¢ didkovot dLddacwv Exdcow TOV 
mapovTwr, meTaraBeiv ard Tod ebyapisyBévTog aprov Kai oivov. Apol. 
2, p. 97. 








248 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


elements. ‘“ Wereceive,” saith he, “ from no one’s hands 
but the bishop’s.”* And yet at the same place, not many 
years after, “the deacons offered the cup to those that 
were present.” So that herein there was a diversity of cus- 
toms; in some places the deacons delivered the elements, 
in others the bishop, or the minister that consecrated 
them. But whether it was done either by bishop or dea- 
cons, it seems probable, that which of them soever did it, 
they delivered the sacramental bread and wine particularly 
to each communicant. I find but one example to the con- 
trary, and that was in the church of Alexandria, where the 
custom was, to permit the people to take the bread them- 
selves from the plate or vessel wherein it was conse- 
crated, as is insinuated by Clemens Alexandrinus;* but in 
most other churches it is likely that the elements were 
particularly delivered to every single communicant. So 
it was in the country of Justin Martyr, where “the dea- 
cons gave to each one of the consecrated bread and wine.”4 
So at Carthage, in the time of Cyprian, “the deacons 
offered the cup to those that were present.”e In the time 
of which father it was usual for children and sucking 
infants to receive the sacrament, unto whom it was neces- 
sary particularly to deliver the elements, since it was im- 
possible for them to take it orderly from the hands of 
others. And therefore when a little sucking girl refused 


@Nec de aliorum manu, quam presidentium sumimus. De Coron. Mi- 
lit. p. 338. 

>Calicem diaconus offerre presentibus ccepit. Cyprian. De Lapsis. 
§ 20, p. 283. 

© Tyv ebyapiciay tive draveivavtec, wc E9oc, abtov OH Exacov Tod 
Aaod AaBetv THY poipav éxitpéxovotv. Stromat. lib. 1, p. 198. 

4H diddoore Kai 4 peTaAnwue ard TOv ebyapicnSévTwr Exdcw yive- 
rat. Apolog. 2, p. 98. 

® Calicem diaconus offerre presentibus cepit. Cyprian. De Lapsis. 
§ 20, p. 283. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 249 


to taste the sacramental wine, “the deacon violently 
forced it down her throat.’”* So it was also at Rome, as 
appears from what Cornelius reports of his antagonist 
Novatian, that “when he administered the sacrament, 
and divided and gave to each man his part; with his two 
hands he held those of the receiver, saying to him, Swear 
unto me, by the body and blood of the Lord Jesus Christ, 
that thou wilt never leave my party, to return to that of 
Cornelius ; so forcing the miserable receiver, instead of 
saying, Amen, to say, I will not return to Cornelius.”® 

§ 7. As for the posture of receiving, at Alexandria the 
custom was to “stand at the table,”* and receive the ele- 
ments, which may be supposed to have been after this 
manner: the bread and wine being consecrated, the com- 
municants came up in order to the communion table, and 
there standing, received the elements, and then returned 
to their places again. But whether this was universal I 
know not, or whether any other postures were used, I 
cannot determine ; only, as for kneeling, if the sacrament 
was celebrated on the Lord’s day, as usually it was, or on 
any other day between Easter and Whitsuntide, then no 
church whatsoever kneeled; for, as Tertullian writes, “ On 
the Lord’s day we account it a sin to worship kneeling, 


a Diaconus reluctanti licet de sacramento calicis infudit. Cyp- 
rian. De Lapsis. § 20, p. 284. 

b Tloujoag yap ta¢ mpoodopac Kai dravépwv éxdcw TO pwépoc, Kai émt- 
d.dove TOvTO, buvbety avti Tob evdoyeiv Tove TadaLTHpove av¥parovg 
avaykdcet, Katéywv cyidotépate Taig Yepot Tag Tod AaBdvToc, Kai uy 
adeic é¢’ av OuvtovTec eltwot TadTA Omooo” LOL KATA TOU GHpmaToc, 
kal Tov aiuatog Tod Kupiov juav ’Inood Xpicod pyndéroré pe KaTahereiv 
Kal éxicpépar mpo¢ Kopv@diov: Kai 6 GYAL0¢ dv8pwrog¢——dyrTi Tob 
elreiv AauBdvovta tov dprov éxeivoyv To Aunv, obxéte avitw Tpo¢ Kop- 
vijatov Aéyet. Apud Euseb. lib. 6, cap. 43, p. 245. 

© Tparély mapasdvta. Ex Epist. Dionys. Alexan. apud Euseb. lib. 
6, cap. 43, p. 245. 








ps 


250 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


which custom we also observe from Easter to Whitsun- 
tide.”* 

§ 8. The elements being thus blessed, distributed, and 
received, they afterward sung a hymn or psalm to the praise 
and glory of God, as Tertullian writes: “'Then every one 
sings a hymn to God, either of his own composition, or 
out of the Holy Scriptures.”’ Then followed, for a con- 
clusion, a prayer of thanksgiving to God Almighty for his 
inestimable grace and mercy: as the same Tertullian 
saith, ‘‘ Prayer concludes this feast.”" To which was 
subjoined a collection for the poor. When, as Justin 
Martyr reports, “‘ every one that was able and willing gave 
according to his ability, and that that was gathered was 
committed to the care of the bishop, who relieved there- 
with the orphans and widows, the sick and distressed, 
prisoners, travellers, strangers, and, in a word, all that had 
need thereof.”¢ 





a Die Dominico nefas ducimus——de geniculis adorare ; eadem 
immunitate die Pasche in Pentecosten usque gaudemus. De Coron. 
Milit. p. 340. 

» Quisque de Scripturis Sanctis, vel de proprio ingenio, provocatur 
in medium Deo canere. Apol. cap. 39, p. 710. 

© Oratio convivium dirimit. Ibidem. 

4 Of eirropoivtec b& Kai of BovAduevoe Kata Tpoaipeowy Exacog THY 
éavtov, 6 BovAetat didwor, Kal TO ovAAEybuEevoy Tapa TH TpoECdTL 
arotivetat, Kai avTo¢ értxoupel Opdavoic Te Kal yApatc, Kal Toic dua 
vooor, 7) 00 GAAnY aitiav AErTomévolc, Kal Toi¢ év Oeapoi¢ ovoL, Kai TOIC 
TapeTLonuole ovat Eévowc, Kal dre Toic év ypeia ovat KNOEMOV yiveTat. 
Apolog. 2, pp. 98, 99. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 251 


CHAPTER VII. 


§ 1. Of the circumstances of public worship. 4 2. Of the place there- 
of. In times of peace fixed places for that end, metonymically called 
churches. § 3. How those churches were built. §4. No holiness 
in those places. §5. Of the time of public worship. § 6. The first 
day of the week a usual time. § 7. Celebrated with joyfulness, es- 
teemed holy, and spent ina holy manner. § 8. Their reasons for the 
observation of this day. §9. The usual title of this day, ‘‘ The 
Lord’s day.” § 10. Sometimes called Sunday, but never the sab- 
bath day. § 11. Saturday, another time of public worship. 


§ 1. Hrruerro I have spoken of the several particular 
acts of the public worship of the ancients: I now come, 
according to my propounded order, to inquire into the 
necessary circumstances thereof; by which I mean such 
things as are inseparable from all human actions, as place 
and time, habit and gesture. As for habit, as much of that 
as is controverted, I have spoken to already in that chapter 
where IJ discoursed of the minister’s habit in prayer. And 
as for gesture, I have already treated of worshipping to- 
ward the east. And of their posture at the reception of 
the Lord’s supper. There is nothing more disputed with 
reference thereunto, besides the bowing at the name of 
Jesus, and the worshipping toward the communion table ; 
but both these being introduced after my prescribed time, 
viz., above three hundred years after Christ, I shall say 
nothing to them, but pass on to the discussing of the two 
remaining circumstances of public worship, viz., place 
and time. 

§ 2. First. As for place; this all will readily grant to 
be a necessary circumstance of divine worship; for if 
we serve God, it is impossible but that it must be in one 
place or other. Now one query with respect hereunto 
may be, whether the primitive Christians had determined, 
fixed places for their public worship? Unto which I an- 


252 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


swer, that usually they had; though it is true indeed, that 
in times of persecution, or when their circumstances would 
not permit them to have one usual fixed place, they met 
wherever they could—“ in fields, deserts, ships, or inns ;”4 
yet in times of peace and serenity they chose the most 
settled convenient place that they could get for the per- 
formance of their solemn services ; which place, by a me- 
tonymy, they called the church. 'Thus at Rome, the place 
where the Christians met, and chose Fabian for their 
bishop, was ‘the church.”» At Antioch, Paulus Samo- 
satenus, bishop thereof, ordered certain women to sing 
psalms to his praise ‘‘in the midst of the church.”’: At 
Carthage, the baptized persons renounced the devil and all 
his works “in the church.”¢ And thus Tertulliane very 
frequently calls their definite places for divine worship 
‘‘ churches.” 

§ 3. As for the form of these churches, or the fashion 
of their building, I find this description of them in Tertul- 
lian: “ The house of our dove-like religion is simple, built 
on high, and in open view, respecting the light as the 
figure of the Holy Spirit, and the east as the representa- 
tion of Christ.”' The meaning whereof is, that their 
churches were erected on high and open places, and made 
very light and shining, in imitation of the Holy Ghost’s 
descent upon the apostles at the day of Pentecost, who 
came down with fire or light upon them; and that they 
were built toward the east, in resemblance of Christ, whom 

@ Tlavnyupixov quiv yéyove ywpiov, aypoc, épnuia, vaic, ravdoyeior, 
Seouwthptov. Dionys. Alex. apud Euseb. lib. 7, cap. 22, p. 268. 

b’Eni ti¢ éxxAnoiac. Euseb. lib. 6, cap. 29, p. 239. 

°’Ep péon TH éxKAnoia. Apud Euseb. lib. 7, cap. 30, p. 281 

4 Inecclesia. Tertul. De Coron. Milit. p. 336. 

® In lib. De Virgin. Veland. 

* Nostre columbe domus simplex, etiam in editis semper et apertis, 


et ad lucem, amat figuram Spiritus Sancti, orientem Christi figuram. 
Advers. Valentin. p. 284. 


SS 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 253 


they apprehended in Scripture to be called the East, con- 
cerning which title, and the reason thereof, I have already 
discoursed in that head concerning praying toward the 
east, unto which place, to avoid repetition, I refer the 
reader. 

§ 4. But though they had these fixed places or churches 
for conveniency and decency, yet they did not imagine 
any such sanctity or holiness to be in them as to recom- 
mend or make more acceptable those services that were 
discharged therein, than if they had been performed else- 
where; for as Clemens Alexandrinus writes, ‘“ Every 
place is in truth holy where we receive any knowledge 
of God.”* And as Justin Martyr saith, “Through Jesus 
Christ we are now all become priests to God, who hath 
promised to accept our sacrifices in every or in any part 
of the world.”® And therefore in times of persecution, or 
such like emergencies, they scrupled not to meet in other 
places ; but wherever they could securely join together in 
their religious services, there they met, though it were “ in 
fields, deserts, ships, inns, or prisons,”* as was the case 
and practice of Dionysius, bishop of Alexandria. So that 
the primitive practice and opinion with respect to this cir- 
cumstance of place was, that if the state of their affairs 
would permit them, they had fixed places for their public 
worship, called churches, which they set apart to that 
use, for conveniency and decency’s sake; but not attri- 
buting unto them any such holiness, as thereby to sanctify 
those services that were performed in them. 

a Ild¢ ovv Kai TOmOg iepoe TH OvTL, év @ THY éxivoray TO BEd Aap- 
Bavouev. Stromat. lib. 7, p. 520. 

> Ov déyerar dé Trap’ oidevog Yuaiac 6 Ode, ei un Ota TOV iepéwv ad- 
Tov: mavrag obv of dia Tov dvépuaTtog TobTOV Buoiag Tac év TwavTt 
TOTW THC Vig ylvouévac bro THY Xpicravdv TpoAaBav 6 Oed¢ pwaprupet 
evapécoue trdpyewv aibt@. Dialog. cum Tryphon. p. 344. 

¢ Tlavynyupikov nyiv yéyove ywpiov, aypoc, épnuia, vaic, wavdoyxeiov, 
Seouwthplov. Dionys. Alexan. apud Euseb. lib. 7, cap. 22, p. 268. 





254 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


I know nothing more with respect to place that requires 
our consideration ; I shall therefore now proceed to in- 
quire into the time of public worship, under which will be 
comprehended the primitive fasts and feasts. 

§ 5. Time is as necessary a circumstance to religious 
worship as place; for whilst we are in this world, we 
cannot serve God at all times, but must have some deter- 
minate time to serve him in: that God’s people therefore 
under the law might not be left at an uncertainty when to 
serve him, it pleased the Almighty to institute the sabbath, 
the passover, and other feasts, at which times they were 
to congregate and assemble together, to give unto God the 
glory due unto his name. And for the same end, under 
the evangelical administration, there are particular days 
and seasons appointed for the public and solemn worship 
of the eternal and glorious Lord, according to the sayings 
of Clemens Romanus, God hath required us to serve him 
“in the appointed times and seasons.”* For which rea- 
son we ought to serve him “ at those determinated times.” 
That so worshipping him “ at those commanded seasons,”* 
we may be blessed and accepted by him. 

§ 6. Now the principalest and chiefest of these pre- 
scribed times was the first day of the week, on which they 
constantly met together to perform their religious services. 
So writes Justin Martyr: ‘“‘On the day that is called 
Sunday, all, both of the country and city, assemble toge- 
ther, where we preach and pray, and discharge all the 
other usual parts of divine worship.”? Upon which ac- 
count those parts of God’s public worship are styled by 


8 ‘Qpiopévoig Katpoic Kai Spare. Epist. 1 ad Corinth. p. 52. 

> Kata kaipove reraypévove. Ibid. 

© Toi¢ mpocerayuévore katpoic. Ibid. p. 53. 

4TH d& Tod HAiov Acyouévyn Huépa, TaVTWY KaTa ronele fy aypove pe- 
vovtwy éri Td avTo avvédevoie yivetat, &c. Apolog. 2, p. 98. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 255 


Tertullian, “'The Lord’s days’ solemnities.”* Aurelius, 
who was ordained a lector, or a clerk, by Cyprian, is de- 
scribed in the execution of his office, “ by reading on the 
Lord’s day.”® And Victorinus Petavionensis represents 
“this day as a usual time wherein they received the 
Lord’s supper ;”* which was observed by the heathen in 
Minucius Felix, who mentions the Christians “ assem- 
bling to eat on a solemn day.”* And Pliny reports, that 
the Christians in his time met together “ on an appointed 
day, to sing praises unto Christ, as a God, and to bind 
themselves by a sacrament.’® 

§ 7. This was the day which Clemens Alexandrinus calls 
“the chief of days, our rest indeed ;”* which they observed 
as the highest and supremest festival. “On Sunday we 
give ourselves to joy,” saith Tertullian. And before him 
St. Barnabas, ‘“ We keep the eighth day with gladness.”* 
And Ignatius, “ We observe the Lord’s day,”! banishing 
every thing on this day that had the least tendency to, or 
the least appearance of sorrow and grief, inasmuch that 
now they ‘esteemed it a sin either to fast or kneel ;”* 


@Dominica solennia. De Anima. cap. 3. p. 530. 

> Dominico legit. Cyprian. Epist. 33, p. 77. 

¢ Die Dominico cum gratiarum actione ad panem exeamus. De Fab- 
ric. Mundi apud D. Cave, p. 103. 

4 Ad epulas solenni die coeunt. p. 26. 

© Essent soliti stato die ante lucem convenire, carmenque Christo 
quasi Deo dicere secum invicem, seque sacramento obstringere. Epist. 
ad Trajan. 

f "Apyéyovov nuépav THY T@ OvTL avaravow Hudv. Stromat. lib. 6, 
p- 492. 

& Diem solis letitie ndulgemus. Apolog. cap. 16, p. 688. 

h”Ayouev Thy nuépav tHY bydénv eic ebopoobvnv. Epist. Cathol. 
§ 11, p. 244. 

i Kara Kupiaxyy Conv Cavtec. Ad Magnes. p. 35. 

k Die Dominico jejunium nefas ducimus, vel de geniculis adorare. 
Tert. De Cor. Mil. pp. 339, 340. 


256 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


even the Montanists themselves, those rigid observers of 
fasts and abstinences, “abstained from fasting on this 
most glad and joying day.”* 

This day they accounted holy, as Dionysius, bishop of 
Corinth, in his letter to the church of Rome, saith, “ To- 
day being the Lord’s day, we keep it holy.”» The way 
wherein they sanctified it, or kept it holy, was the employ- 
ing of themselves in acts of divine worship and adoration, 
especially in the public parts thereof, which they con- 
stantly performed on this day, as has been already proved; 
and in that forementioned letter, where Dionysius, bishop 
of Corinth, wrote unto the church of Rome, that that day 
being the Lord’s day, they kept it holy. The manner of 
sanctifying it is immediately subjoined: ‘In it,” saith he, 
“we have read your epistle, as also the first epistle of 
Clemens.”« And Clemens Alexandrinus writes, “ That a 
true Christian, according to the commands of the gospel, 
observes the Lord’s day by casting out all evil thoughts, 
and entertaining all good ones, glorifying the resurrection 
of the Lord on that day.”4 

§ 8. The reason why they observed this day with so 
much joy and gladness was, that they might gratefully 
commemorate the glorious resurrection of their Redeemer, 
which happened thereon. So writes St. Barnabas: “ We 
keep the eighth day with gladness, on which Christ arose 


@ Quantula est enim apud nos interdictio ciborum, duas in anno heb- 
domadas xerophagiarum nec totas, exceptis scilicet sabbatis et Domini- 
cis, offerimus Deo. ‘ert. De Jejunio, p. 651. 

> Tv onepov obv Kupraxyy dyiav nuépav duyydyouev. Apud Euseb. 
lib. 4, cap. 23, p. 145. 

c°Ky @ dveyvokauev vudv tHv émicoAny 
juiv dia KAjpevtoc ypageioav. Ibidem. 

4 Ovrog évToAny THY KaTa TO ebayyédLov StaTtpakduevoc, Kupraxyy 
éxeivny THY juépay ToLel, 67 dv aT0BGAAy, dadiAov vonua Kal yroce- 
Kov TpooAdByn, THY év avTH Tod Kupiov dvdcaow dosalwyv. Stromat 
lib. 7, p. 535. 





Wo Kal THY TpoTEpay 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. S57 


from the dead.”* So says Ignatius, “Let us keep the 
Lord’s day, on which our life arose through him.”» 

And so says Clemens Alexandrinus: “He that truly 
observes the Lord’s day, glorifies therein the resurrection 
of the Lord.”* Justin Martyr relates that “on Sunday 
the Christians assembled together, because it was the first 
day of the week, on which God, out of the confused chaos, 
made the world, and Jesus Christ, our Saviour, arose from 
the dead; for on Friday he was crucified, and on Sunday 
he appeared to his apostles and disciples, and taught them 
those things that the Christians now believeé.”4 And to 
the same purpose Origen adviseth his auditors to pray unto 
Almighty God, “ especially on the Lord’s day, which is a 
commemoration of Christ’s passion; for the resurrection 
of Christ is not only celebrated once a year, but every 
seven days.”® 

§ 9. From hence it was that the usual appellation of 
this day both by the Greek and Latin churches was, “ the 
Lord’s day.” So it is styled by Clemens Alexandrinus, 
Tv Kupiaxyy quépay, ‘the Lord’s day,” and amongst the 


a”Ayouey THY Huepav THY oydOnv Eig Ebdpoodbvyy, év h Kat 6 Incote 
dvicn éx vexpOv. Epist. Catholic. § 11, p. 244. 

> Kara Kupraxny Conv Covtec, év @ Kat 7 Con quar avéretAev OV ad- 
tov. Epist. ad Magnes. p. 35. 

© Kupiaxyy éxeivyv tiv juépav roret 
avacacly dogdlwv. Stromat. lib. 7, p. 535. 

1Tyv 68 tod HAiov nuépay Koh Tavtes THY ovVéAEvOLY ToLotmEda, 
éredn TPOTH eclv juépa, Ev H 6 OLd¢ TO oKdTOE Kai THY bAnY Tpépac, 
Koapov éroince, Kai "Inootg Xpico¢ 6 tpuéTEpog owtnp TH adTH Huépa 
éx vexpov avécn? TH yap TPO TH¢ Kpovixgjg écatpwoay adirov, kal TH 
peta THY Kpovixyy, Hrig ecw HAtov yuépa, davele Toi¢g arocéAoLe avTov 
kat padntaic, édidage taita arep cic érxioxepiy Kai vuiv dvedoxapuer. 
Apolog. 2, p. 99. 

e Maximé in dominica die, que passionis Christi commemoratrix est : 
neque enim resurrectio Domini semel in anno, et non semper post sep- 
tem dies celebratur. In Isaiam, Homil. 5. 

f Stromat. lib. 5, p. 437, and lib. 7, p. 535. 





THY év aitH Tod Kupiov 


258 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


Latins, by Victorinus Petavionensis, dies Dominicus,* “ the 
Lord’s day.”® As also by an African synod,° and by Ter- 
tullian.¢ Sometimes it is simply called, 7 Kvpraxy, and 
Dominicus, that is, ‘the Lord’s,” without the addition of 
the word “ day,” as it is thus called ry Kupraxyv, by Igna- 
tius, and Dominicus, by Cyprian.® 

§ 10. So that “the Lord’s day” was the common and 
ordinary title of this blessed and glorious day ; though some- 
times, in compliance with the heathens, that they might 
know what day they meant thereby, they called it in their 
phrase ‘‘ Sunday,” so termed because dedicated to the sun. 

Thus Justin Martyr, informing the heathens of the time 
and manner of the Christians’ assemblies, tells them, that 
“on the day called Sunday they met together for their 
religious exercises,” and that “on Sunday they assem- 
bled together.”* And so Tertullian, upon the same occa- 
sion, lets the heathens know that the Christians “ indulged 
themselves on Sunday to mirth and joyfulness.”s 

But though they so far complied with the heathens as to 
call this Sunday, yet I do not find that they ever so far 
indulged the Jews as to call it the sabbath day ; for through 
all their writings, as may be especially seen in Tertullian, 
and Justin Martyr,’ they violently declaim against sabba- 
tizing, or keeping the sabbath day, that is, the Judaical ob- 
servation of the seventh day, which we must always under- 
stand by the word sabbatum in the writings of the ancients, 
not the observation of the first day, or the Lord’s day ; for 


4 De Fabric. Mundi apud Dr. Cave, Hist. literar. p. 103. 

> Dies Dominicus. Apud Cyprian. Epist. 53, § 3, p. 164. 

© Dominicum diem. De Idolol. p. 623. 

4 Ad Magnes. p. 35. e Epist. 33, p. 77. 

(TH Tod nAiov Aeyouévn Huépa TaVTWY KATA TOAELC 7) aypods MEvor- 
Tov én TO avTO ovvéhevole yiveTat Thy d& TOD HAiov juépav. Apol. 
2, pp. 98, and 99. 

& Diem solis letitie indulgemus. Apolog. cap. 16, p. 688. 

h Advers. Judzos. i Dialog. cum Tryphon. 





THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 259 


that was constantly celebrated, as it has been already 
proved, and by those who condemn the observance of the 
sabbath day, the sanctification of the Lord’s day is ap- 
proved and recommended, as by Justin Martyr and Ter- 
tullian in those passages already cited, unto which we may 
add that clear passage of Ignatius, “‘ Let us no longer sab- 
batize, but keep the Lord’s day, on which our Life rose.” 
Or as itis more fully expressed in his interpolated epistle, 
“Instead of sabbatizing, let every Christian keep the 
Lord’s day, the day on which Christ arose again; the 
queen of days, on which our Life arose, and death was 
conquered by Christ.» 

§ 11. Sothat their not sabbatizing did not exclude their 
keeping of the Lord’s day nor the Christian, but only the 
Judaical observance of the sabbath, or seventh day; for 
the eastern churches, in compliance with the Jewish con- 
verts, who were numerous in those parts, performed on the 
seventh day the same public religious services that they 
did on the first day, observing both the one and the other 
as a festival, Whence Origen enumerates “ Saturday”* 
as one of the four feasts solemnized in his time; though, 
on the contrary, some of the western churches, that they 
might not seem to Judaize, fasted on Saturday, as Victo- 
rinus Petavionensis writes, ‘‘ We use to fast on the seventh 
day,” and, “it is our custom then to fast, that we may not 
seem with the Jews to observe the sabbath.”4 


®@Mnkéte oaBbarivovrec, GAAd Kata Kupraxny Guonv Cavtec, ev h Kat 
7 Con hpov avéterrev Ov avtov. Epist.ad Magnes. p. 35. 

b Kata rd caBbatioa Eopratétw mae giAdypiso¢g THY Kupiaxny, THY 
avasdouov, THY braTov Tacdy THY iEpov éy y Kal 7 Con Nar. 
dvéretae, Kal Tob Gavdtov yéyove vikn év Xpic>. Epist. Interpol. ad 
Magnes. p. 149. 

© Tlapackevov. Contra Cels. lib. 8, p. 393. 

4 Die septima solemus superponere Parasceve superpositio 
fiat, ne quod cum Judezis sabbatum observare videatur. De Fabric. 
Mund. apud D. Cave, p. 103. 











260 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


So that besides the Lord’s day, Saturday was a usual 
season whereon many churches solemnized their religious 
services. As for those other times in which they publicly 
assembled forthe performance of divine worship, they will 
fall under the two general heads of Times of Fasting and 
Times of Feasting, of which in the following chapters. 


CHAPTER VIII. 


§ 1. Of the primitive fasts, two-fold, occasional and fixed. Of occasional 
fasts, what they were, and by whom appointed. § 2. Of fixed fasts, 
two-fold, weekly and annual. Wednesdays and Fridays weekly fasts ; 
till what time of the day observed, and why observed. § 3. One ne- 
cessary annual fast, viz., Lent. Why they fasted at Lent, and how 
long it lasted. §4. Of the manner of their fasts. Three sorts of 
fasts, viz., Statio, Jejunium, and Superpositio. What those several 
kinds were, and at what times observed. 


§ 1. In this chapter I shall make an inquiry into the 
primitive fasts, which may be considered in a two-fold 
respect, either as occasional, or fixed. 

Occasional fasts were such as were not determined by 
any constant fixed period of time, but observed on extra- 
ordinary and unusual seasons, according as the variety and 
necessity of their circumstances did require them. Thus 
in times of great and imminent danger, either of church or 
state, when by their sins they had kindled God’s wrath 
and fury against them, that they might divert his vengeance, 
and appease his offended majesty, they appointed set days 
and times for the abasing of themselves before the Lord, 
for the seeking of his face by praying and fasting, abstain- 
ing from the food of their bodies, and practising all exter- 
nal acts of humiliation, as so many indications of the in- 
ternal contrition of their hearts and souls. So Cyprian, 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 261 


in the time of a sharp persecution, advised his flock “to 
seek to appease and pacify the Lord, not only by prayers, 
but by fastings, and by tears, and by all kinds of en- 
treaties.”* And when the same father foresaw an ap- 
proaching persecution, he wrote to Cornelius, bishop of 
Rome, “ That since God was pleased in his providence to 
warn them of an approaching fight and trial, they ought, 
with their whole flocks, diligently to fast, and watch, and 
pray, to give themselves to continual groans, and frequent 
prayers; for those are our spiritual arms that make us 
firmly to stand and persevere.”» 

Tertullian jeers the heathens, ‘“‘ That in time of danger 
or great necessity, after they had voluptuously and sen- 
sually glutted themselves, they then run to the capitol, and 
with all outward signs of humility, deprecated God’s judg- 
ments, and implored his mercy, whilst in the mean time 
they were enemies unto him, but,” says he, “ we, on such 
emergencies and occasions, abstain from all things, give 
ourselves wholly to fasting, roll ourselves in sackcloth 
and ashes, and thus incline God, as it were, to repent, to 
have mercy and compassion upon us ; for by this way God 
is honoured.”: 

These occasional fasts were appointed by the bishops 


a Ad placandum atque exorandum Dominum, non voce sola, sed et 
jejuniis, et lacrymis, et omni genere deprecationis ingemiscamus. 
Epist. 8, § 1, p. 22. 

> Quoniam providentia Domini monentis instruimur appropm- 
quare jam certaminis et agonis nostri diem, jejuniis, vigiliis, orationibus 
insistere, cum omni plebe non desinamus, incumbamus gemitibus assi- 
duis et deprecationibus crebris: hec sunt enim nobis arma ceelestia; 
que stare et perseverare fortiter faciunt. Epist. 57, § 3, p. 159. 

© Denique cum ab imbribus zstiva, hyberna suspendunt, et annus in 
cura est, vos quidem quotidie pasti, statimque pransuri, balneis et cau- 
ponis et lupanaribus operati, aquilicia Jovi immolatis, nudipedalia popu- 
lo denunciatis, ceelum apud capitolium queritis, nubila de laquearibus 
expectatis, aversi ab ipso et Deo et ceelo. Nos vero jejuniis aridi, et 





262 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. ° 


of every church, as they saw fit and necessary. So writes 
Tertullian: ‘‘ The bishops are wont to ordain fasts for their 
churches according as the circumstances of the churches 
require.”@ 

§ 2. The next sort of fasts were set or fixed ones, that 
is, such as were always observed at the same time and 
season; and these again were two-fold, either weekly or 
annual. First, weekly. ‘These were kept every Wednes- 
day and Friday, as Clemens Alexandrinus relates that 
“they fasted on every Wednesday and [riday.”» These 
fasts were commonly called stations, in allusion to the 
military stations of the soldiers standing when on the 
guard. ‘Thus ‘Tertullian mentions their “stationary days,’¢ 
and writes that ‘“‘ Wednesdays and Fridays were stations.”4 
On these stationary days their fasts ended “at three o’clock 
in the afternoon ;”* whence they are called by Tertullian, 
“the half fasts of stations,”? though some on Fridays 
lengthened out their fast “ till evening.”s 

Why they fasted on Wednesday rather than any other 
day of the week, I cannot find; but on Friday they chose 
to fast ‘‘ because Christ was crucified thereon.” 

§ 3. The next sort of fixed fasts is such as are annual, 
of which kind they had but one, viz., Lent. And indeed 
besides this they had no other necessary fixed fast, neither 
omni continentia expressi ab omni vite fruge dilati, in sacco et cinere 
volutantes, invidia celum tundimus, Deum tangimus, et cum misericor- 
diam extorserimus, Jupiter honoratur. Apol. cap. 40, p. 711. 

a Episcopi universe plebi mandare jejunia assolent ex aliqua soli- 
citudinis ecclesiastice causa. De Jejun. cap. 13. 

b THe vyceiag THE TETPAdOC Kal THE Tapackevgnc. Stromat. lib. 7, 
p. 534. 

¢ Stationum dies. De Orat. p. 661. 

4 Stationibus quartam et sextam sabbati dicamus. De Jejunio, p. 651. 

€ Non ultra nonam detinendum. ‘Tertul. De Jejun. p. 648. 

f Stationum semijejunia. Ibid. 650. 

& Jejunium facimus. Victor. Petav. apud D. Cave, p. 103. 

h Ob passionem Domini. Victor. Petay. ubi antea. 








THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 263 


weekly nor yearly ; the faithful were not strictly obliged 
to the observation of any other, as will be evident from 
what follows. 

It is true, they fasted Wednesdays and Fridays, but this 
was ex arbitrio, of their own free will and choice, not ex 
wnperio, of command or necessity. For when the Mon- 
tanists began to impose as a duty other stinted fasts, they 
were for so doing branded as heretics. ‘“ Who,” saith 
Apollonius concerning Montanus, “is this new doctor? 
His works and doctrine evidently declare him; this is he 
that teaches the dissolution of marriages, and prescribes 
fasts.”* And for the same practice they were accused by 
the orthodox “ for Galaticising, or committing the error of 
the Galatians in observing days, and months, and years.” 

But that the ancients esteemed Lent to be the only neces- 
sary fixed fast, and any other, even the stationary days, to 
be indifferent, will appear most evidently from this ensu- 
ing passage of Tertullian. Tertullian being now a Mon- 
tanist, and defending their prescribed fasts against the 
orthodox, thus jeeringly exposes the opinions of his ad- 
versaries with respect to the necessary determined times 
of fasting. ‘“ Forsooth,” saith he, “they think that, ac- 
cording to the gospel, those days are to be prescribed 
fasts, wherein the bridegroom was taken away, (1. e. Lent,) 
and those to be the only fasts of Christians, the legal and 
prophetical fasts being abolished ; and that for others we 
may indifferently fast, according to our will, not out of ne- 
cessity or command, but according to our circumstances 
and conditions, and that so the apostles observed, com- 
manding no other fixed and common fasts besides this ; 


a Tic écwv ovTo¢ 6 mpbodatoc diddoKadoc; Taépya adbrov Kai 7 Oidac- 
Kania deixvvcw: ovtog ecw 6 diddsac AbcELe yawr, 6 vnceiag vouote- 
thoac. Apud Euseb. hb. 5, cap. 18, p. 184. 

> Galatis nos quoque percuti aiunt observatores dierum, et mensium, 
etannorum. Tert. De Jejun. p. 645. 


264 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


no, not the stationary days, which indeed they keep on 
Wednesdays and Fridays, and do all observe, but yet not 
in obedience to any command, or to the end of the day, 
but prayers are concluded at three o’clock in the after- 
noon, according to the example of Peter in the Acts.” 

So that from hence it is evident, that the orthodox ap- 
prehended themselves to be free from the necessary obser- 
vation of the stationary fasts, and to be only strictly obliged 
to fast on those days wherein the Bridegroom was taken 
away; or on Lent, from which periphrasis of Lent we may 
collect both the reason and the duration thereof. 

First. The reason thereof, or the ground on which they 
founded the necessity of this fast, and that was on the say- 
ing of Christ in Matthew ix, 15: “ The days will come 
when the Bridegroom shall be taken from them.” This 
they imagined to be an injunction of Christ to all his fol- 
lowers to fast at that time when the Bridegroom should 
be taken away. The Bridegroom they esteemed to be 
Christ, the time when he was taken away, his crucifixion, 
death, and continuing under the power of death to the in- 
stant of his resurrection, during which time they thought 
themselves, by the forementioned command, obliged to 
fast. 

Secondly. From hence we may observe the duration 
of this fast, or how long it was continued, and that was, 


@ Certé in evangelio illos dies jejuniis determinatos putant, in quibus 
ablatus est sponsus: et hos esse jam solos legitimos jejuniorum Christi- 
anorum, abolitis legalibus, et propheticis vetustatibus, Itaque de 
cztero indifferenter jejunandum ex arbitrio, non ex imperio nove disci- 
pline, pro temporibus et causis uniuscujusque : sic et apostolos obser- 
vasse, nullum aliud imponentes jugum certorum et in commune omni- 
bus obeundorum jejuniorum : proinde nec stationum ; que et ipse suos 
quidem dies habeant quarte feria et sexte, passim tamen currunt, ne- 
que sub lege precepti neque ultra supremam diei, quando et orationes 
fere hora nona concludat de Petri exemplo quod actis refertur. De Je- 
junio, p. 645. 





THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 265 


from the time that Christ the Bridegroom was taken away, 
to the time that he was restored again, that is, from his 
passion to his resurrection. Now, according to their 
various computations of the beginning and end of Christ’s 
being taken away, so was the duration of their fast ; some 
might reckon from Christ’s agony in the garden, others 
from his being betrayed by Judas; some again from his 
being fastened to the cross, and others from his being 
actually dead: and so, according to these diversities of 
computations, were their fasts either lengthened or short- 
ened. ‘This we may probably suppose to be the occasion 
of the different observations of this fast with respect to its 
duration, as we find it in Ireneus. “Some,” says he, 
“esteem that they must fast but one day, others two, 
others more, and some allow to this fast forty hours.’* 
Which last space of time seems to have been their general 
and common allowance; whence this fast was afterward 
called teccapaxocy, or, quadragesima, that is, not a fast of 
forty days, in imitation of Christ’s fasting in the wilder- 
ness, but a fast of forty hours, beginning at Friday, twelve 
o’clock, about which time Christ was dying, and ending 
Sunday morning, when Christ arose. So that from twelve 
o’clock Good Friday, as we call it, when Christ the Bride- 
groom was taken away, they fasted, in obedience to his 
command, as they imagined, till Sunday morning, when 
he was found again by his resurrection, at which time 
they forgot their sorrow and mourning, concluded their 
fast, and began the joyful festival of Easter, or of Christ’s 
resurrection. 

§ 4. As for the manner of their fasts, we may observe 
them to be of three sorts, viz., statio, jeyunium, and super- 
positio ; station, fasts, and superposition ; all which three are 

@ Oi ev yap oiovTat piav Huépav Ociv aitov¢ vasevery, oi Jé dbo, ob 
d& Kal tAeiovac, ol df TecoapdKovtTa pac tuepivag Te Kal VUKTEpLVag 
ovuuetpodar THY juépav avtov. Apud Euseb. lib. 5, cap. 24, p. 393. 

12 


266 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


at once mentioned by Victorinus Petavionensis: ‘ We 
fast,” says he, “ till the ninth hour, or till evening, or there 
is a superposition till the next morning.””* 

I. There was the fast of stations, which ended at three 
o’clock in the afternoon, or at the ninth hour, as it is called 
in the forecited passage of Victorinus Petavionensis. ‘This 
sort of fastmg was used on Wednesdays and Fridays, 
which days, as we have shown before, were called sta- 
tionary days, and on them divine services were ended 
at three o’clock in the afternoon, for which reason Mon- 
tanizing ‘Tertullian terms them “the half fasts of sta- 
tions.””» 

II. The next sort was strictly called jejunium, or a fast; 
which, according to the forecited place of Victorinus Pe- 
tavionensis, lasted till evening: of this sort, it is probable, 
their occasional fasts were, as ‘T'ertullian writes, ‘‘ In times 
of necessity and danger we dry up ourselves with fasting, 
abstain from all meat, roll ourselves in dust and ashes, 
and by these means cause God to have mercy upon us ;”¢ 
though it is also likely, that in times of more imminent 
danger they extended those fasts unto that of superposition. 

The second sorts of fasts was observed by some on 
Fridays, who turned the station into a fast, as Victorinus 
Petavionensis writes, “On Friday, in commemoration of 
the Lord’s passion, I either keep a station or observe a 
fast.”"4 

III. The last sort of fasts was called superposition, or, 

4 Usque ad horam nonam jejunamus, usque ad vesperam, aut super- 
positio usque in alteram diem fiat. De Fabric. Mundi apud D. Cave, 
p- 103. 

b Stationum semijejunia. De Jejun. p. 650. 

¢ Denique cum ab imbribus estiva, &c. Nos jejuniis aridi, et om- 
ni continentia aspersi-——Invidid cceelum tundimus. Apolog. cap. 40, 
pe 4is: 


4 Ob passionem Domini Jesu Christi aut stationem do, aut jejunium 
facimus. De Fabric. Mundi apud D. Cave, p. 103. 





THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 267 


as by the Greeks, irép¥ecrc, which lasted till the morning 
of the next day, according to that of Victormus Petavio- 
nensis, ‘‘ Let superposition be done till the next day.”* 

As for the times when this fast was observed, I find that 
in some of the western churches, they so kept every 
Saturday throughout the year, fasting thereon till mid- 
night, or till the beginning of Sunday morning, as Victor- 
inus Petavionensis says, “ Let superposition be done on 
Saturdays, lest we should seem to observe the Jewish 
sabbath.”* But not only in these, but in other churches 
also, they so fasted on Easter eve, or the Saturday pre- 
ceding that Sunday, which, being Lent, was so necessary 
and usual, that Tertullian, enumerating those particular 
acts of divine worship that a Christian woman could not 
freely perform, if married to a pagan husband, reckons 
this as one, ‘That on Easter-eve she could not stay up 
and watch that night:”° but to please her husband, must 
be diverted from this necessary fast, that ushered in the 
glorious festival of Easter ; which brings me, in the next 
place, to inquire into this, and their other feasts, of which 
in the ensuing chapter. 


a Superpositio usque in alterum diem fiat. De Fabric. Mundi apud 
D. Cave, p. 103. 

» Parasceve superpositio fiat, ne quod cum Judzis sabbatum obser- 
vare videamur. Ibid. p. 103. 

© Quis solemnibus Pasche abnoctantem securus sustinebit. Ad Uxor. 
lib. 2, p. 429. 


268 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


CHAPTER IX. 


§ 1. Of the primitive feasts, two-fold, occasional and fixed. § 2. Of 
Easter. § 3. Of Whit-Sunday. §4. Of Christmas. On what day 
of the year Christ was born. § 5. Of Epiphany. § 6. Besides these 
no other feasts in commemoration of Christ, the Virgin Mary, or the 
apostles. ‘The apostles not called saints in the primitive writings. 
§ 7. Festivals in commemoration of the martyrs. Observed on the 
annual day of their martyrdom. Persons appointed to take an exact 
account of the day of their decease. § 8. Why those festivals were 
observed. ‘The day of the martyr’s death termed their birth-days. 
§ 9. The place where these festivals were solemnized. Of the bury- 
ing-place of the ancients. § 10. The manner of the observation of 
these festivals. 


§ 1. As the primitive fasts were two-fold, so likewise 
were their feasts either occasional or fixed. As for those 
that were occasional, I shall pass them over, because not 
controverted, and come immediately to inquire into their 
fixed feasts, which, as their fasts, were also two-fold, either 
weekly or annually. Of their weekly feasts, which were 
Sundays, and in the oriental churches, Saturdays, I have 
already discoursed, so that there only remains an inquiry 
into their annual feasts, which, besides the martyrs’ festi- 
vals, were two, viz., Easter and Whit-Sunday, or at most 
three, viz., Easter, Whit-Sunday, and Christmas, of each 
of which in their order. 

§ 2. I begin with Easter, as being the most ancientest 
feast of all, concerning which Tertullian writes, “ We 
celebrate Easter in the first month every year.”* Cyp- 
rian mentions their “ Easter solemnities,”® and Origen 
reckons Easter as one of the four festivals observed in his 
time. But that they solemnized Easter is a thing so well 
known, that it will be unnecessary to prove it, especially 

a Pascha celebramus annuo circulo in mense primo. De Jejun. p. 651. 


> Solemnia Pasche. Epist. 53, § 2, p. 131. 
© Tot Idoxa. Contra Celsum, lib. 8. p. 392. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 269 


since every one knows, or at least might easily know, 
those sharp contests and debates that were in the church 
about the time when it should be kept; the whole affair 
hath been at large related by several hands in our own 
tongue ; amongst others by the most learned Dr. Cave in 
his “ Apostolici,” in the life of Irenzus, to which I refer the 
curious: contenting myself with giving a very brief ac- 
count of the controversy, which was this: The churches 
of the Lesser Asia kept their Easter the same day that the 
Jews kept their passover, on what day of the week soever 
it happened. The church of Rome, with other churches, 
kept it the Lord’s day after. ‘This diversity of customs cre- 
ated a violent disorder and confusion amongst the Christians ; 
for the church of Rome would impose their usages on the 
churches of the Lesser Asia, unto which the latter peremp- 
torily refused to submit. To appease these heats and storms, 
Polycarp, bishop of Smyrna, came to Rome to confer with 
Anicetus, bishop of that church, about it, who agreed that 
every church should be left to follow its own custom, as 
accordingly they were to the time of Pope Victor, who 
revived this controversy, and was so turbulent and impe- 
rious as that he excommunicated the Asiatics for refusing 
to comply with the church of Rome in this matter, con- 
demning them as heretics, loading them with the long and 
frightful name of 'Tessareskaidekatite, or, Quartodecimani, 
so called because they kept their Easter qguarta decima 
luna, upon the fourteenth day after the appearance of the 
moon, or atthe full moon, on what day soever it happened. 
But, however, the Asiatics stood their ground, and still 
maintained their old custom, till the council of Nice, anno 
325, by their authority decided this controversy, decree- 
ing, that throughout the whole Christian world, Easter 
should be observed, not on the day on which the Jewish 
passover fell, but on the Lord’s day ensuing, as it was ever 
after observed and followed. 


270 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


§ 3. The next feast that was observed was Whit-Sun- 
day, or Pentecost, in commemoration of the Holy Ghost’s 
descent on the apostles, which also was very ancient, be- 
ing mentioned several times by Tertullian ;+ and reckoned 
by Origen for one of the ‘four festivals observed in his 
time,”® the other three being Sundays, Saturdays, and 
Easter. 

§ 4. As for Christmas, or the time of Christ’s nativity, 
there is a passage in Clemens Alexandrinus which seems 
to intimate that it was then observed as a festival: for 
speaking of the time when Christ was born, he says, that 
those who had curiously searched into it, affixed it to the 
twenty-fifth day of the month Pachon. But the Basilidian 
heretics held otherwise, ‘‘ who also observed, as a feast, 
the day of Christ’s baptism.”* From which words, “ who 
also,” if that be the meaning of the words d’—xai, one 
might be apt to infer, that the meaning of Clemens Alex- 
andrinus was, that the Basilidians not only feasted at the 
time of Christ’s nativity, but also at the time of his bap- 
tism. But whether this interpretation will hold I leave 
the learned reader to determine. On the contrary, there 
are other considerations» which more strongly insinuate 
that this festival was not so early solemnized: as that 
when Origen reckons up the feasts “‘ observed in his age,” 
he mentions not one syllable of Christmas ;4 and it seems 
improbable that they should celebrate Christ’s nativity, 
when they disagreed about the month and day when Christ 
was born. 

4De Coron. Milit. p. 340. De Baptism, p. 604. & De Idololatria, 
p- 623. 

> Ta wrepi Tov rap’ yuiv Kupiaxdv,  Tapackevdv, 7 Tod Idoya, 7 
THe TlevtyKochg Ov yuepOv ylvoueva. Contra Celsum. lib. 8, p. 392. 

© Oj dé dx0 BaorAcidov Kai Tob Bartiopatog abtot THY Huépav Eop- 
Tafovet. Stromat. lib. 1, p. 249. 

4 Kupiakov TApPAOKEVOV 
Celsum. lib. 8, p. 392, 


Ilevtykosyne. Contra 








Ilaoya 





THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 271 


Clemens Alexandrinus reckons “from the birth of 
Christ to the death of Commodus, exactly one hundred 
ninety-four years, one month, and thirteen days ;”* which 
years must be computed according to the Nabonassar, or 
Egyptian account, who varied from this in our year, in that 
they had only three hundred and sixty-five days in a year, 
never taking notice of the odd hours, or quadrant of a day, 
that every fourth year makes a whole day, and are accord- 
ingly by us then added to the month of February, which 
makes the bissextile or leap year. So that though the 
Egyptians always begun their year with the first day of 
the month Thoth, yet making no account of the annual 
odd hours, that month wandereth throughout the whole 
year: and whereas now the first day of that month is the 
first day of our March, about seven hundred years hence 
it will be the first of September; and after seven hundred 
years more, or near thereabouts, it will come to the first 
of March again. Wherefore that we may reduce unto our 
style this calculation of Clemens Alexandrinus, we must 
deduce, for those odd hours which are not accounted, one 
month and eighteen days, and so reckoning the birth of 
Christ from the death of Commodus, which happened on 
the first day of January, to be one hundred ninety-four 
years, wanting five or six days, it will appear that Christ 
was born on the twenty-fifth or twenty-sixth of the month 
of December, according to the Julian account, which is 
the epoch we follow. 

But as the same father farther writes in the same place, 
“There were some who, more curiously searching after the 
year and day of Christ’s nativity, affixed the latter to the 
twenty-fifth of the month Pachon.”» Now in that year in 


* Tivovtat ovv ad’ ov 6 Képrog éyevvgdn two Kopuddov tekevting ta 
TavTG@ ETH EKaTOV EvvEv_KOVTA Técoapa, pIV Eic, Huépat ty. Stromat. 
lib. 1, p. 249. 

> Eiot dé of weptepyotepov TH yevécet Tod owTipoc fudy ob povov TO 


272 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


which Christ was born the month Pachon commenced the 
twentieth day of April: so that according to this compu- 
tation Christ was born the sixteenth day of May. Nay, 
there were yet some other ingenious men, as the same 
father continues to write, ‘“ that assigned Christ’s nativity 
to the twenty-fourth or twenty-fifth of the month Pharmu- 
thi,”? which answers to our sixteenth or seventeenth of 
April: so that there were diversities of opinion concern- 
ing the time of Christ’s birth, which makes it very proba- 
ble that there was then no particular feast observed in 
commemoration of that glorious and transcendent mercy. 

§ 5. There is yet another feast called by us Epiphany, 
wherein there is a commemoration of Christ’s baptism, 
which I find to have been peculiarly solemnized by the 
Basilidian heretics. For thus Clemens Alexandrinus re- 
ports it to be a particular custom of theirs, “to keep as a 
festival the day of Christ’s baptism.”? The day on which 
Christ was baptized, “ they said to be the fifteenth of the 
month T'yby, in the fifteenth year of the reign of the em- 
peror Tiberius,”* which answers to our one-and-thirtieth 
of December; or as others imagined it, “on the eleventh 
of the month Tyby,”? which was the seven-and-twentieth 
of our December. 

§ 6. Besides these forementioned festivals, there were 
none others observed to the honour of the blessed Jesus, 
nor of the Virgin Mary, nor of the holy apostles and evan- 
gelists ; and which may be a little observable, it is verv 





éT0¢, GAAa Kai THY Huépav TproTLBévTEc, Ev daciy 
Xov Kai eikaddt. Stromat. lib. 1, p. 249. 

4 Kai py tivéc avtov gaci Pappovdi yeyevvaoar Kd 7 ke. Thid. 
p. 249. 

> Of dé ard Baoureidov Kat Tob Banticuatoc abrod Tiy juépav Eéop- 
tagovet. Ibid. p. 249. 

© baci dé eivat TO TevTeKatdéxatov éETo¢ T3epiov Kaicapoc, Thy 
mevtexaldekaTyny Tov TvBi punvoc. Ibid. p. 249. 

4 Tivec d& abtinv évdexatyny Tod adbtod pnvoc. Ibid. 


év weuntyH Ia- 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 273 


seldom, if ever, that the ancients give the title of saints to 
those holy persons, but singly style them Peter,* Paul,» 
John,° &c., not St. Peter, St. Paul, or St. John. 

§ 7. But now there was another sort of festivals which 
every church celebrated in the commemoration of its own 
martyrs, which was on the anniversary day of their martyr- 
doms: they assembled together, where they recited the 
martyrs’ glorious actions, exhorted to an imitation of them, 
and blessed God for them. So says Cyprian, ‘The 
passion of the martyrs we celebrate with an anniversary 
commemoration.”¢ And so writes Tertullian, “Upon the 
annual day of the martyrs’ sufferings, we offer thanks to 
God for them.”*& When this practice began cannot cer- 
tainly be determined ; it is first found mentioned in the 
letter of the church of Smyrna to the church of Philomi- 
lium, touching the death of Polycarp, wherein they write, 
«That they had gathered up his martyred bones, and 
buried them in a decent place, where,” say they, “ if pos- 
sible, we will meet to celebrate with joy and gladness the 
birthday of his martyrdom.” Hence, that they might be 
certain of the very day of the martyr’s sufferings, there 
were some appointed to take an exact account of them, 
and faithfully register them, that there might be no mis- 
take. Thus Cyprian wrote from his exile to the clergy 


4 A Petro ordinatum. Tert. De Prascript. advers. Heret. p. 78. 

> Tune Paulus, &c. Idem. Scorpiac. advers. Gnostic. p. 615. 

¢ Ab Johanne conlocatum. Idem. de Prescript. advers. Heret. p. ‘78. 

4 Martyrum passiones et dies anniversaria commemoratione celebra- 
mus. Epist. 32, § 3, p. 80. 

© Oblationes pro defunctis, pro natalitiis annua die facimus. De Co- 
ron. Milit. p. 339. 

f "Hyueic dvedouevor ta Tyudtepa AiSwv ToAvTEAGY Kal SoKmaTepa 
irétp ypvoiov bcG abrod, drediueda brov Kai axddovdov hv, tvda o¢ 
Ovvatov juiv ovvayouévolc év dyaAddoer Kai yapd, wapéSer 6 Kvpiog 
émitedeiy Thy Tod wapTuplov abTod juépav yevéSAcov. Apud Euseb. 
lib. 4, cap. 15, p. 135. 

12* 


274 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


of his church, “That they should take special care ex- 
actly to note down the very day of the martyrdom of the 
faithful, that so they might be commemorated amongst the 
memories of the martyrs, and to signify to him the precise 
time of their departure to a glorious immortality, that so 
he might also celebrate it.”* 

§ 8. The reasons for which they observed these festi- 
vals we find in the forementioned letter of the church of 
Smyrna, wherein they write “that they would meet to 
celebrate with joy and gladness the martyrdom of Poly- 
carp, for the commemoration of those who had already 
gloriously striven, and for the confirmation and prepara- 
tion of others by their examples.” So that their design 
was two-fold, to animate and encourage others to follow 
the glorious examples of those heroic martyrs, who were 
commemorated before their eyes, and to declare the honour 
and veneration that they had for those invincible cham- 
pions of Jesus Christ, who by their martyrdoms were now 
freed from all their miseries and torments, and translated 
to a blessed and glorious immortality, in a happy manner 
experiencing the truth of that scripture in Ecclesiastes vii, 
1, that ‘“‘ the day of a man’s death is better than the day of 
his birth.” Whence the time of the martyrs’ deaths was 
usually termed their birthday, because then was the period 
of their grief and trouble, and a beginning of their ever- 
lasting bliss and felicity. ‘Thus in the forementioned 
letter of the church of Symrna, concerning the death of 
Polycarp, they write, “That they would meet to celebrate 

4 Dies eorum, quibus excedunt, annotare, ut commemorationes eorum 


inter memorias martyrum celebrare possimus Significet mihi dies 
quibus in carcere beati fratres nostri ad immortalitatem gloriose mortis 


exitu transeunt, et celebrentur hic a nobis oblationes et sacrificia ob 
commemorationes eorum. Epist. 37, § 2, pp. 87, 88. 

b-Emireneiv tiv Tov wapTupiov abtod juépav yevéSALov, Eig Te TOV 
TMponGAnkoTov pvynunv, Kai TOV wEAAovTwV doKyalv TE Kai ETOLMACLar. 
Apud Euseb. lib. 4. cap. 15, p. 135. 





THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 975 


with joy and gladness the birthday of his martyrdom.”* 
And so Tertullian says, that “they annually commemo- 
rated the birthdays of the martyrs; that is, their death- 
days ;”® as he writes in another place concerning St. Paul, 
“ That he was born at Rome, when he suffered martyrdom 
there.” 

§ 9. As for the place where these anniversary solemn- 
ities were performed, it was at the tombs of the martyrs, 
who were usually buried with the rest of the faithful, in 
a distinct place from the heathens, it being their custom to 
inter the Christians by themselves, separate from the pa- 
gans; accounting it a heinous crime, (if possibly it could 
be prevented,) to mingle their sacred ashes with the de- 
filed ones of their persecuting and idolatrous neighbours. 
Wherefore in the ratification of the deposition of Martia- 
lis, bishop of Astorga, by an African synod held anno 258, 
this was one of the articles alleged against him, “ That 
he had buried his sons after the pagan manner, in Gentile 
sepulchres, amongst men of another faith.”¢ And for this 
reason it was that the surviving Christians would run upon 
ten thousand hazards to collect the scattered members of 
the dead martyrs, and decently to inter them in the com- 
mon repository of the faithful. As when Emilian, the 
barbarous prefect of Egypt, forbad any, under severe pen- 
alties, to entomb the dead bodies of the murdered saints 
and sedulously watched if any would dare to do it, yet 
Eusebius, a deacon of Alexandria, “ resolutely ventured 

4 Tot uaptupiov abtovd juépav yevéSaiov. Apud Euseb. lib. 4, cap. 
15, p. 135. 

» Oblationes pro defunctis. pro natalitiis annua die facimus. De Cor. 
Milit. p. 339. 

¢ Tunc Paulus civitatis Romane consequitur nativitatem, cum illic 
martyrii renascitur generositate. Scorpiac. advers. Gnostic. p. 615. 

4 Filios exterarum gentium more apud profana sepulchra depo- 


sitos, et alienigenis consepultos. Apud Cyprian. Epist. 68, § 7, p. 
202. 





276 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


upon it;”’* and it is applauded by the historian as an act of 
religious boldness and freedom, whereby Asturias, a Roman 
senator, rendered himself renowned, in that when “ he saw 
the martyrdom of Marinus at Cesarea, he took his martyred 
body, clothed it with a precious garment, bore it away on 
his own shoulders, and magnificently and decently interred 
it.” And in a letter from the Christians of Lyons and 
Vienna, in France, to the churches of Asia, concerning 
their sore and grievous persecutions, we find them passion- 
ately complaining of the inhumane cruelty of their perse- 
cutors, ‘That neither prayers nor tears, neither gold nor 
silver, could prevail with them to permit them to collect 
the dead bodies of their murdered brethren, and decently 
to inter them.’”* As on the other hand, the faithful of the 
church of Smyrna rejoiced that they had gotten the most 
precious bones of Polycarp, which they buried, ézov xai 
axdaovdor jv, ubt decebat, “ where they ought,’ as Valesius 
renders it; that is, as seems most probable, at the common 
burying place of the Christians. 

Now it was at these tombs and sepulchres that the 
memories of the martyrs were solemnized. ‘Thus in the 
forecited letter of the church of Smyrna to the church of 
Philomilium, they write that “in that place where they 
had interred the bones of Polycarp, they would, by the 


aTa¢ Tov Cwuatoy TEepicohac TOY TeAgiwy Kat waKapiwY OVK GKLy- 
divac éxtedeiv. Dion. Al. apud Euseb. lib. 7, cap. 11, p. 61. 

b Tlapov tyvixdde TEeAElovuévywy TH papTupl, TOV Gpov brovele Ext 
Aaumpic Kat TOAvTEXODG EDHTOC dpacg 6 OKHVO? ExipépEeTal, TEpLsetdag 
TE EU pdda TAOVOIwWs TH TpoonKoton Tady Tapadidwot. Euseb. lib. 7, 
cap. 16, p. 264. 

© Ta dé kal jude év peydaw KadercHKker Tévbet, Osa 76 uy SbvacFat 
Ta oGmata Kpbwat TH yh OVTE yap VUE GvVEBadAAETO Huiv Tpd¢ TodTO, 
ovte dpytpla Erev0ev, ovTE AiTaveia EOVOMTEL, TaVTi O& TPOTW TapETA- 
povy wc péya TL KepdaivovTes, et pn THYOLEV Tadye. Apud Euseb. lib. 
5, cap. 1, p. 169. 

‘ Apud Euseb. lib. 4, cap. 15, p. 135. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. PH Mf 


blessing of God, assemble together, and celebrate his mar- 
tyrdom ;”* which was a practice so usual and constant as 
that the heathens observed it: so that as on the one hand, 
under the persecution of Valerian, Aimilian, the prefect 
of Egypt, threatened Dionysius Alexandrinus and his fel- 
low-sufferers, that for their obstinacy and ingratitude, as he 
termed it, he would send them into Lybia, to a desert place 
called Cephro, ‘“ where they should not meet together, or 
go to those places called cemeteries.”» ‘That is, the places 
where the martyrs and the rest of the faithful were buried; 
so, on the other hand, when Galienus, Valerian’s son, re- 
stored peace to the churches, he published an express 
edict ‘“ for returning to the Christians the cemeteries that 
were taken from them.”¢ 

§ 10. If in the next place it shall be inquired, how they 
observed these festival days, I answer, that they did not, 
according to the fashion of the heathens, spend them in riot 
and debauchery, in bacchanalian revellings and luxury, but 
in religious exercises and employments, im prayers and de- 
votions. ‘“ He,” saith Origen, “ truly keeps a festival who 
does what he ought to do, always praying, and by his 
prayers offering up unbloody sacrifices unto God.’4 

The solemnities of these feast-days were not drunken- 
ness and gluttony, but acts of piety and charity. Now 
they publicly assembled, as the church of Smyrna writes 


a”Evta o¢ dvvarov nuiv ovvayouévoig év ayaddidoe, Kai yapd, 
mapétet 6 Kipiog éritedeiv tTHv Tod paptupiov avTov Huépav yevédALov. 
Apud Euseb. lib. 4, cap. 15, p. 135. 

> Oidapcs dé &écat y ovvedove toteio Vat, 
peva KouyinThpia eiovévat. Dion. Alex. apud Euseb. lib. 7, cap. 11, 
p- 258. 

¢ Td tv Kadovuévor Koyuntnpior arodauBave éxitpérav xuwpia. 
Apud Euseb. lib. 7, cap. 13, p. 262. 

4 ‘Eoprager ye kata dAgvevav, 6 Ta déovta TpdTTwr, del ebyopuevoc, 
duct TavtTo¢g Siwv Tac GvarudKTouvc, év Taig mpo¢ TO Oeiov edyaic, v- 
otac. Contra Celsum. lib, 8, p. 392. 


n > ‘ 4 
i) €i¢ TH KaAot- 








278 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


in her letter concerning the death of Polycarp, “to com- 
memorate the martyrs’ courage and triumphs, and to ex- 
hort and prepare others to the same glorious and renowned 
actions.”* Or, as Tertullian expresses it, ‘ Now they 
offered oblations.”» As Cyprian, “ They offered oblations 
and sacrifices ;”* that is, they offered thanks and praise to 
God, that had given grace to those martyrs to seal his 
truth with their blood, and, in evidence of their gratitude, 
distributed of their substance to the poor and indigent. 


CHAPTER X. 


§ 1. Of the rites and ceremonies: the difference between them. § 2. Of 
ceremonies: many used by the ancients, which through various ways 
crept into the church. § 3. Of rites: every church followed its own 
rites without imposing them on any other. § 4. The members of 
every church obliged to observe the rites of that church where they 
lived. § 5. The conclusion of this inquiry, with an earnest persua- 
sion to peace, unity, and moderation. 


§ 1. Havine in the precedent chapters inquired into 
the several parts of divine worship, and the circumstances 
thereof, I now come to close up all with a brief appendix 
concerning rites and ceremonies, by which I mean two 
different things: by rites I understand such actions as 
have an inseparable relation to the circumstances or man- 
ner of worship; as for instance, the sacrament was to be 
received in one manner or other, but whether from the 
bishop or deacon, that was the rite. Lent was to be ob- 
served a certain space of time, but whether one day, or 

a EKi¢ te Tov mpondAnKoTor uvHYY, Kal TOV wEAAOVTWOY GoKnoly TE 
kai étoysaciav. Apud Euseb. lib. 4, cap. 15, p. 135. 

> Oblationesfacimus. De Coron. Milit. p. 339. 

* Celebrentur hic a nobis oblationes et sacrificia. Epist. 37, § 2, p. 88. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 279 


two days, or three days, that was the rite thereof. So 
that rites are the necessary concomitants of the circum- 
stances of divine worship, appendages to them ; or, if you 
rather please, you may call them circumstances them- 
selves. 

By ceremonies, I mean such actions as have no regard 
either to the manner or circumstances of divine worship, 
but the acts thereof may be performed without them ; as 
for instance, in some churches they gave to persons, 
‘“‘ when they were baptized, milk and honey.”* And, “ be- 
fore they prayed, they washed their hands.” Now both 
these actions I call ceremonies, because they were not 
necessary to the discharge of those acts of divine worship 
unto which they were affixed; but those acts might be 
performed without them: as baptism might be entirely 
administered without the ceremony of giving milk and 
honey, and prayers might be presented without washing 
of hands. 

Now, having explained what I intended by the two 
terms of rites and ceremonies, let us in the next place 
consider the practice of the primitive church with refer- 
ence thereunto. And first, for ceremonies. 

§ 2. It is apparent that there were many of that kind 
crept into the church, of which we may say, that from the 
beginning they were not so: for when “the quire of the 
apostles was dead, till which time,” as Hegesippus writes, 
“the church remained a pure and unspotted virgin,” then 
the church was gradually spotted and corrupted, as in her 
doctrine, so also in her worship, an infinity of ceremonies 


4 Suscepti lactis et mellis concordiam pregustamus. ‘Tertul. De 
Coron. Milit. p. 337. 

> Manibus ablutis Orationem obire. Idem. De Oratione. p. 659. 

© 'Q¢ & iepig TOV UrocbAwY yopd¢ Jiddopov EiAjger Tod Biov TéAOg 
Thvixaita the adéov ThavnG THY apyHY eAGuUBavev H obsactG. 
Apud Euseb. lib. 3, cap. 32, p. 104. 








280 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


by degrees insensibly sliding in, very many of which were 
introduced within my limited time, as “the eating of milk 
and honey after baptism, the abstaiming from baths the 
week after,’* “the washing of their hands before prayer, 
their sitting after prayer,”’ and many other such lke, 
which, through various ways and means, winded them- 
selves into the church; as some came in through custom 
and tradition: one eminent man perhaps invented and 
practised a certain action, which he used himself, as judg- 
ing it fit and proper to stir up his devotion and affection : 
others, being led by his example, performed the same ; 
and others again imitated them, and so one followed an- 
other, till at length the action became a tradition and 
custom, after which manner those ceremonies were in- 
troduced “of tasting milk and honey after baptism, of 
abstaining from the baths the whole ensuing week, of 
not kneeling on the Lord’s day, and the space between 
Easter and Whitsuntide, of the signing themselves with 
the sign of the cross in all their actions and conversations, 
concerning which and the lke Tertullian writes, ‘ That 
there was no law in Scripture for them, but that tradition 
was their author, and custom their confirmer.’’’* Of which 


@ Suscepti lactis et mellis concordiam pregustamus, exque ea die la- 
vacro quotidiano per totam hebdomadem abstinemus. Tertul. De Co- 
ron. Milit. p. 337. 

> Manibus ablutis orationem obire adsionata oratione assiden- 
di mos est quibusdam. Idem. De Orat. pp. 659, 660. 

© Suscepti lactis et mellis concordiam pregustamus, exque ea die la- 
vacro quotidiano per totam hebdomadem abstinemus die Dominico 
nefas ducimus de geniculis adorare : eadem immunitate a die Pasche 
in Pentecosten usque gaudemus ; ad omnem progressum atque promo- 
tum, ad omnem aditum et exitum quecunque nos conversatio exer- 
cet, frontem crucis signaculo terimus. Harum et aliarum ejusmodi 
disciplinarum si legem expostules Scripturarum, nullam invenies ; tra- 
ditio tibi pretendetur auctrix, consuetudo confirmatrix. Idem. De Co- 
ron. Milit. pp. 337, 340, 341. 














THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 281 


custom we may say what Tertullian says of custom in 
general, that “commonly custom takes its rise from igno- 
rance and simplicity, which by succession is corroborated 
into use, and so vindicated against the truth: but the Lord 
Christ hath called himself truth, and not custom; where- 
fore, if Christ was always, and before all, then truth was 
first and ancientest. It is not so much novelty as verity 
that confutes heretics: whatsoever is against the truth is 
heresy, although it be an old custom.”* 

Others again were introduced through a wrong exposi- 
tion or misunderstanding of the Scripture ; so were their 
exorcisms before baptism, and their unctions after baptism, 
as in their proper places hath been already shown. 

Finally, others crept in through their dwelling amongst 
the pagans, who in their ordinary conversations used an 
infinity of superstitions ; and many of those pagans, when 
they were converted to the saving faith, Christianized 
some of their mnocent former ceremonies, as they es- 
teemed them to be; either thinking them decent and 
proper to stir up their devotion, or likely to gain over more 
heathens, who were offended at the plainness and naked- 
ness of the Christian worship, of which sort were, “ their 
washing of hands before prayer, their sitting after prayer, 
and such like.” Concerning which Tertullian affirms 
that they were practised by the heathens. 

So that by these and such like methods it was, that so 
many ceremonies imperceptibly slid into the ancient 


a Fere consuetudo initium ab aliqua ignorantia vel simplicitate sor- 
tita in usum per successionem corroboratur, et ita adversus veritatem 
vindicatur: sed Dominus noster Christus veritatem se, non consuetu- 
dinem cognominavit. Si semper Christus et prior omnibus, exque 
veritas sempiterna et antiqua res Hereses non tam novitas quam 
veritas revincit : quodcunque adversus veritatem sapit, hoc erit heresis, 
etiam vetus consuetudo. De Virg. Veland. p. 385. 

b Manibus ablutis orationem obire adsignata oratione assi- 
dendi mos—gentilibus adequant. De Orat. pp. 650, 669. 











282 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


church, of some of which Tertullian gives this severe 
censure: “That they are deservedly to be condemned as 
vain, because they are done without the authority of any 
precept, either of our Lord or of his apostles; that they are 
not religious, but superstitious, affected, and constrained, 
curious rather than reasonable, and to be abstained from 
because heathenish.’s 

§ 3. As for the rites and customs of the primitive church, 
these were indifferent and arbitrary ; all churches being left 
to their own freedom and liberty to follow their peculiar 
customs and usages, or to embrace those of others, if they 
pleased ; fom whence it is that we find such a variety of 
methods in their divine services, many of which may be 
observed in the precedent part of this discourse ; as some 
received the Lord’s supper at one time, others at apother; 
some churches received the elements from the hands of the 
bishop, others from the hands of the deacons ; some made 
a collection before the sacrament, others after; some kept 
Lent one day, some two days, and some exactly forty hours; 
some celebrated Easter on the same day with the Jewish 
passover, others the Lord’s day after; and so in many 
other things one church differed from another, as Firmilian 
writes, that “at Rome they did not observe the same day 
of Easter, nor many other customs which were practised 
at Jerusalem ; and so in most provinces many rites were 
varied according to the diversities of names and places.”> 


@ Quibus merito vanitas exprobanda est, siquidem sine ullius aut Do- 
minici aut apostolici precepti auctoritate fiunt: hujusmodi enim non 
religioni, sed superstitioni deputantur, affectata et coacta, et curiosi po- 
titis quam rationalis officil. Certé vel eo coércenda quod gentilibus 
adequent. De Orat. p. 659. 

» Circa celebrandos dies Pasche, et circa multa alia divine rei sacra- 
menta videat esse apud alios aliquas diversitates, nec observari illic om- 
nia equaliter, que Hierosolymis observantur, secundum quod in ceteris 
quoque plurimis provinciis multa pro locorum et nominum diversitate 
variantur. Apud Cyprian. Epist. 75, § 5, p. 237. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 283 


So that every church followed its own particular cus- 
toms, although different from those of its neighbours, it 
being nothing necessary to the unity of the church to have 
a uniformity of rites ; for, according to Firmilian, the unity 
of the church consisted “in a unanimity of faith and truth,”* 
not in a uniformity of modes and customs; for, on the 
contrary, the diversity of them, as Ireneus speaks with 
reference to the fast of Lent, “did commend and set forth 
the unity of the faith.”» 

Hence every church peaceably followed her own cus- 
toms, without obliging any other churches to observe the 
same ; or being obliged by them to observe the rites that 
they used; yet still maintaining a loving correspondence, 
and mutual concord each with other; as Firmilian writes, 
“That in most provinces many rites were varied accord- 
ing to the diversities of names and places ; but yet,” saith 
he, ‘never any one for this broke the peace and unity of 
the church.”*« One church or bishop did not in those days 
anathematize another for a disagreement in rites and cus- 
toms ; except when Victor, bishop of Rome, through his 
pride and turbulency, excommunicated the Asiatic bishops 
for their different observations of Easter from the church 
of Rome; which action of his was very ill resented by the 
other bishops of the Christian churches, and condemned 
by them as alien from peace and unity, and contrary to 
that love and charity which is the very soul and spirit of 
the gospel; even the bishops of his own party that cele- 
brated Easter on the same day that he did, censured his 
rashness and violence as unchristian and uncharitable, and 


4 Fidei et veritatis unanimitatem. Apud Cyp. Epist. 75, 9 2, p. 236. 

>'H dradwvia tie vyceiag THY Oudovolay TIE TicEws ovvicnot. Apud 
Euseb. lib. 5, cap. 24, p. 236. 

¢ Plurimis provinciis multa pro locorum et nominum diversitate vari- 
antur, nec tamen propter hoc ab ecclesie catholice pace atque unitate 
aliquando discessum est. Apud Cyprian. Epist. 75, § 5, p. 237. 


284 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


wrote several letters, wherein “ they severely checked 
him,’”* as Eusebius reports, in whose time they were ex- 
tant, all which are now lost, except the fragments of an 
epistle, written by Irenzus, and other bishops of France, 
wherein “they affirm that Victor was in the right with 
respect to the time of Easter, that it ought to be celebrated, 
as he said, on the Lord’s day, but that yet he had done very 
ill to cut off from the unity of the church those that ob- 
served it otherwise; that it had never been known that 
any churches were excommunicated fora disagreement in 
rites, an instance of which there was not only in the time 
of Easter itself, but in the fast that preceded it: some 
fasted one day, others more; some forty hours: which 
variety of observations began not first in our age, but long 
before us, in the times of our ancestors, who yet preserved 
peace and unity amongst themselves, as we now do; for 
the diversity of fasts commended the unity of faith: and 
as for this controversy concerning the time of Easter, the 
bishops which governed the church of Rome before Soter, 
viz., Anicetus, Pius, Hyginus, Telesphorus and Xystus, 
they never celebrated it the same time with the Asiatics, 
neither would they permit any of their people so to do: 
but yet they were kind and peaceable to those who came 
to them from those parishes where they did otherwise ob- 
serve it, and never any for this cause were thrown out of 
the church; even your predecessors, though they did not 
keep it, yet they sent the eucharist to those that did keep 
it; and when, in the times of Anicetus, blessed Polycarp 
came to Rome, and there were some controversies between 
them, they did not separate from one another, but still 
maintained peace and love; and though Anicetus could 
never persuade Polycarp, nor Polycarp Anicetus, to be of 
each other’s mind, yet they communicated one with an- 
other; and Anicetus, in honour to Polycarpus, permitted 


a TlAnkrixorepov xadantouévov. Lib. 5, cap. 24, p. 192. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 285 


him to consecrate the sacrament in his church, and so they 
departed in mutual love and kindness; and all the churches, 
whether observing or not observing the same day, retained 
peace and unity amongst themselves.”* 

§ 4. But though one church could not oblige another to a 
conformity in rites and customs, yeta particular church or pa- 
rish could enforce its own members to sucha conformity ; an 
instance whereof we meet with in that famous controversy 
about the time of Easter. It was the custom ofthe Asiatics 
to celebrate the feast at the full moon, or at the same time 
with the Jewish passover, on whatsoever day of the week 
it happened. It was the manner at Rome to observe it 


@ Tlapicarat piv 70 deiv év povyn TH Tho Kuptakie quépa TO The TOD 
Kupiov avacdoews ériteAsioSat wuchpiov, TH ye unv Bixtope mpoon- 
KOVTUS HC py aToKéTTOL bAacg éxKAnoiacg Oeod apyaiov EXove tapddo- 
ow énitnpovoac. ovd? yap povov wept THe Tuépac écuv 7 audloB7- 
THO, GAAd Kal TEpl Tod Eldove abTot THe vacEiacg Of wév yap OiovTat 
piav juépav Osiv above vaceterv, of J dbo" of 62 Kai TAEiovac, ot dé 
recoapdkorta pac huepivde Te kal vuKTepivac ovupeTpotor Ty Tuépav 
aiTav: Kai TotabTn pév ToLKLAia Tév éExiTnpotbvTwr ob viv é@? Tav ye- 
yovvia, GAAa Kai TOAD mpbTEpov Exit TOY TPO HudY Kat ovdéev EXaT- 
TOV TaVTEG OVTOL EipHvEevody Te Kai Eipyvetouev TPOG GAAHAOVE, Kai 7 
Oragwvia THE VaCEiag THY Omovolay TH¢ Tisews CvvicnoL kat ob ™pod 
LwrHpo¢ mpecBbTepor of Tporcdvrec THe ExkAnolag he viv agnyy,’Avi- 
KnTov Aéyouev Kat Iliov, ‘Yyivév te kat TeAcopdpov kat Zicov, ovte 
avTol étipnoav, ovTE Toi¢ pet’ adrove éxétpeTov, Kai oddev EXaTTOY av- 
TOL pH THpOdYTES Elphvevoy Toi¢ ard THY TapoLKLOy ev ai¢ ETNPEITO Ep- 
Homévole Mpo¢ adbTove Kai ovdérore Oa TO eidog TodTO aTEBAASHoav 
TivEec, GANG adToi Ly THPODVTEC OL TPO GO’ TpEGBITEpOL, TOig GTO TOY 
TApOLKLay THPOvOLY EreuTOV Evyaplciay, Kai Tov wakapiov IloAvKdproV 
éxtOnunoavtoc év ‘Pon ext ’Avixfrov, Kai Tept GAAwy Tivdv piKpa 
oxovtec Tpo¢ GAAHAOVG, EvTiC elpHvevoayv, TEpi TOUTOV Tot Kedadaiov 
pn dtAepicnoartes mpog EavTove’ ote yap’Avixytoc Tov IloAtKaprov 
meioat édtvaTo my THpEiv obre pyv 6 IloAdxaproc tov ’Avixytov 
émevoe THPELV Kal TObTWY ObTaC éxyévTWV, ExoLvVOvyncay éEavToi¢ Kal 
éy th ékKAnoia mapexopyoev 6 ’Avixntog evyapiciav TH ToAvedpre 
Kar’ évytporyy OndAovétt, Kai pet’ elphvng an’ GAdjAwY anynA2dynoar, 
maone The exxAnotac eipnyyny éyovTwv Kal TOV THPObYTwWY, Kal TOV MH 
tnpotvtwv. Apud Euseb. lib. 5, cap. 24, pp. 192, 193. 




















286 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


the Lord’s day after, and both these churches quietly fol- 
lowed their several usages, without imposing them on 
each other. But yet the churches of Asia permitted none 
of their members to solemnize it after the Roman man- 
ner; neither did the churches of Rome, or of the west, 
license any of their inhabitants to celebrate it after the 
Asiatic manner; for if either of them had granted any 
such thing, there must have ensued confusion and disor- 
der, to have seen Easter differently observed in one and 
the same church; whilst some members of a parish were 
fasting, to behold others feasting, would have been a perfect 
ataxy and irregularity: therefore though Anicetus, bishop 
of Rome, retained peace and unity with foreign churches 
that differed from him as to the time of Easter, without 
obliging them to a compliance with the Roman custom, 
yet he peremptorily required it of the members of his own 
church, and “ would never permit them’? to solemnize 
that feast on the same time with the Asiatics. 

So that though every church had the liberty to use what 
rites she pleased, yet every particular member had not, 
but was obliged to observe the manners and customs of 
that church where he lived, or where he occasionally 
communicated. A church collective, or the majority of a 
church with their bishop, could change their old customs, 
and introduce new ones, as was done in the affair of Eas- 
ter, the Asiatics at length submitting to the Roman usage; 
but till that was done, every particular member was re- 
quired to follow the old customs of that church to which 
he belonged, and not to bring in any innovations or new 
rites, because, as was said before, that would beget tu- 
mults and disorders, and the person so acting would be 
guilty of that strife and contention which is condemned by 
those words of the holy apostle, 1 Corinthians xi, 16: 


@ Oire toic per’ abtove émétperov. Iren. apud Euseb. lib. 5, cap. 
24, p. 193. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 287 


“ But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such 
custom; neither the churches of God.” Which is as if 
the apostle had said, If any men, either to show their wit, 
or to head and strengthen a party, will contradict what we 
have said, and affirm it to be decent and comely either for 
men to pray covered, or women uncovered, this should 
silence such contentious opposers, that there is no such 
rite or custom in any of the churches of God. Their 
practice is the very same with what we have directed 
unto, and therefore to that they ought peaceably and qui- 
etly to submit and yield. 

Thus now I have finished this inquiry, and have, as far 
as I could, searched into what was first proposed. If I 
have not illustrated any point as clearly as might be ex- 
pected, the reason is, because I found nothing farther per- 
tinent thereunto in those writings to which I am confined; 
if 1 had, I should freely have mentioned it. Whether I 
have been mistaken in the sense or meaning of any pas- 
sage, | must leave unto my readers to judge ; all that I can 
say is, that 1 am not conscious to myself of any wilful and 
designed mistakes, having throughout this whole discourse 
endeavoured to find out the plain and naked truth, without 
being biased to any party or faction whatsoever; and if 
any one shall be so kind and favourable as to convince 
me of any slips or errors, which I may have committed 
through inconsideration, or want of due understanding, I 
shall thankfully acknowledge, and willingly renounce 
them, and leave them. 

§ 5. What hath been related concerning the constitu- 
tion, discipline, unity, and worship of the primitive church, 
shall suffice. I have nothing more to add, but mine earnest 
entreaty and persuasion unto all those into whose hands 
this little treatise shall fall, to imitate and follow the prim- 
itive Christians in their moderation, and the peaceableness 
of their temper and disposition. In those happy days the 


288 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


Christians were so eminent above all other sects for their 
mutual love and charity, that the heathens observed it with 
astonishment, and cried out with admiration, “ Behold, 
how they love one another!”* “ We are,” saith Tertul- 
lian, “ready to die for each other; and we call one an- 
other brethren, because we acknowledge one and the same 
God and Father, and have been sanctified by the same 
Holy Spirit, and have been brought from the same state 
of ignorance to the light of the same marvellous truth.» 
But alas! “ How is the gold become dim! How is the 
most fine gold changed !”* How is that love and charity 
now turned into malice and cruelty! Pity, and compas- 
sion, and tender-heartedness, have left the world, and envy, 
hatred, and rancour, are succeeded in their places; love 
is now exploded as ungenteel and mean, charity is con- 
demned as abject and base, whilst hatred, revenge, and 
fury; are esteemed as noble and generous. 

But, “O Lord, how long!” Shall malice and envy, 
wrath and pride, for ever ride triumphant and uncontrolled? 
When wilt thou, O Prince of peace, and God of love, heal 
our breaches, and compose our differences, and cause us, 
“ with all lowliness, and meekness, and long-suffering, to 
forbear one another in love, endeavouring to keep the 
unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace ?”4 

We have already too long unnaturally quarrelled, and to 
the dishonour of God, and the scandal of religion, have 
most unchristianly abused each other: I speak not this 
only of one party, but of all: we have all been guilty as 


@ Vide inquiunt, ut invicem se diligunt. Tertul. Apolog. cap. 39, 
p. 709. 

> Pro alterutro mori sunt parati Fratres nos vocamus quia 
unum patrem Deum agnoverunt, qui unum Spiritum biberunt sanctita- 
tis, qui de uno utero ignorantie ejusdem ad unam lucem expiraverunt 
veritatis. Ibidem, p. 709. 

© Lam. iv, 1. 4 Ephes. iv, 2, 3. 








THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 289 


to this matter, we have all erred and gone astray from the 
most holy commandment, and have been deficient every 
one of us in this great and necessary duty of love and 
unity: we have loathed concord, and loved jars and divi- 
sions, and have been always backbiting, persecuting, and 
maligning one another to this very day, never at all remem- 
bering that we were brethren, and professors of the same 
blessed and glorious religion. 

But what shall I say? This theme is too harsh and 
displeasing. If it is an unpleasant work to rip up those 
uncharitable actions, may they be buried in perpetual 
silence and oblivion, and never more be remembered, so 
as to stir up anger and revenge, but only so as they may 
produce in us all humility, repentance, and mutual forgive- 
ness; let us now with our floods of penitential tears at 
once quench God’s anger for our past divisions, and the 
flames of our present fire and heats, that so there may be 
no fuel for future contentions ; and being grieved that we 
have played the fool so long, we may now the more firmly 
resolve, by the grace of God, to do so no more: that so, 
however infamous we have been heretofore for our blind 
zeal, and unaccountable animosities, we may for the time 
to come be highly renowned and conspicuous for our ar- 
dent love and fervent charity, “‘ Putting away all bitterness, 
and wrath, and anger, and clamour, and evil speaking, 
with all malice, being kind to one another, tender-hearted, 
forgiving one another, even as God for Christ’s sake hath 
forgiven us: “ putting on (as the elect of God, holy and 
beloved) bowels of mercy, kindness, humbleness of mind, 
meekness, long-suffering, forbearing one another and for- 
giving one another.”> 

Certain I am we need no arguments to induce us here- 
unto; both the necessity and facility of love and unity 
require it at our hands; its necessity is evident from 

a Ephes. iv, 32, 33. > Colos. ili, 12, 13. 
13 


290 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


hence, that whilst we spend our zeal and heat,about these 
inconsiderable matters, the very foundations of faith and 
morals are attacked and shaken: atheism increases, im- 
morality prevails, and those damnable heresies which for 
many ages have been silenced and abandoned, are now 
revived by men of a corrupt faith, who take an occasion 
from the lawlessness and licentiousness of this present 
age, to vent those cursed tenets which eradicate and de- 
stroy all religion; it is to be feared, that unless we hasten 
to compose our differences about the skirts and fringes of 
religion, the very vitals and essentials thereof will be cor- 
roded and devoured by heresy and profaneness. 

And as for these and the like reasons, the necessity of a 
union or comprehension is manifest on the one hand, so 
the facility of such a union is as apparent on the other 
hand; for, thanks be to God, our differences are neither 
about faith nor,manners; we all believe in one and the 
same God, hope to be saved by one and the same Re- 
deemer, desire to be sanctified by one and the same Sanc- 
tifier, receive one and the same Scriptures, assent to the 
same doctrines, and acknowledge the necessity of the 
same duties. Our disputes are only about lesser matters, 
about modes and forms, about gestures and postures, and 
such like inferior matters, about which it should grieve a 
wise man to quarrel, and which with the greatest ease in the 
world might be composed and settled, if managed by men of 
prudence and moderation ; and such men, it is hoped, are 
the reverend bishops advanced by their majesties; whose 
promotion to those places of dignity and trust many honest 
and peaceable men look upon as a good omen and prog- 
nostic of our future union and happy establishment. 

With these two considerations let us remember those 
solemn vows and engagements which we made to Almighty 
God, and to one another, in the day of our late distress ; 
how we then vowed and promised, that if God would be 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 29) 


pleased to deliver and rescue us, we would forget our dif- 
ferences, and mutually condescend and abate of our rigour 
and severity: wherefore now, since God hath so wonder- 
fully saved us, let us not be so perfidious and faithless as 
to neglect to perform what we then obliged ourselves unto, 
but let us willingly and conscientiously discharge it, lest 
God bring severer judgments on us than ever, and at once 
utterly destroy us, both root and branch, for our lying, 
perjury, and hypocrisy. 

Many other such cogent arguments I might easily pro- 
duce ; but that I may avoid too great prolixity and tedious- 
ness, I shall urge but one more, which is, that unless we 
have a uniting spirit, and a peaceable disposition, we 
are no true Christians, we unjustly arrogate that glorious 
name ; for the very soul of Christianity is love and char- 
ity: “The kingdom of God,” saith the apostle, ‘is not 
meat and drink,” not zealous disputes and strifes about 
lesser points, “‘ but righteousness, and peace, and joy in 
the Holy Ghost; for he that in these serveth Christ, is 
acceptable to God, and approved of men.”* It is an ab- 
surdity and a mere contradiction, for a man to say he is 
religious, and yet to be malicious and uncharitable. Our 
Saviour flatly tells us, that “ by this all men shall know 
that we are his disciples, if we have love one to another.””» 
We may talk what we please of religion, and profess what 
we list; the word of God is plain, that whosoever hath 
not love and charity is no Christian: but to allude to that 
of Christ, John x, 1, ‘“‘ He is a thief anda robber,” he hath 
not the Spirit of God abiding and dwelling in him; for, 
“The fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, long-suffering, 
gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance.”¢ 
And, “ The wisdom from above is peaceable, gentle, and 
easy to be entreatedypfull of mercy and good fruit ;”4 so 


a Rom. xiv, 17, 18. John xii, 35. ¢ Gal. v, 22, 23. 
4 James iii 17. 


292 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


that the very soul and spirit of Christianity consists in 
unity, love, and amity. 

Wherefore let my entreaties be prevalent with you to 
endeavour for a mutual compliance and comprehension, as 
you have any regard to the honour of God, and the credit 
of religion ; as you would hinder the growth of damnable 
errors, and abominable debaucheries, and do what in you 
lies to prevent the ruin and damnation of multitudes of 
poor souls; nay, as you would secure your own salvation, 
and be able with confidence to appear at the dreadful and 
impartial day of judgment, let me conjure you, in the name 
of God, “ to love one another with a pure heart fervently,” 
‘to follow after righteousness, godliness, faith, love, pa- 
tience, meekness ;”» to forget and pardon all former inju- 
ries and affronts ; “doing nothing,” for the time to come, 
“through strife or vain-glory, but in lowliness of mind each 
esteeming others better than themselves, doing all things 
without murmuring or disputing,” “avoiding all foolish and 
unlearned questions, knowing that they do but gender 
strifes, behaving yourselves like the servants of the Lord, 
who must not strive, but be gentle unto all men, apt to 
teach, patient,”4 mutually complying with each other, do- 
ing all things unto edification ; labouring after peace and 
unity, that so we may at length “ with one mind, and one 
mouth, glorify God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus 
Christ.” 

And for the accomplishment of this blessed and glori- 
ous design, let us above all things avoid pride and vain- 
glory, which, as it is to be feared, hath no small share both 
in the causing and increasing of our divisions: we have 
been so stiff and self-conceited, and have stood so much 
upon the pitiful punctilios of honour, that we have refused 
to condescend to one another, or to join in a way of com- 

21 Pets, 22: > 1 Tim. vi, 11. rs ii, 3, 14. 42 Tim. 
ii, 23, 24. ° Rom. xv, 5. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 293 


prehension, or mutual relaxation, which seems to be the 
only way left for union and agreement, if ever we hope or 
intend to have it. Wherefore let me address myself unto 
you in the words of the reverend and moderate Bishop 
Hall: “ Men, brethren, and fathers, help ; for God’s sake, 
put your hands to the quenching of this common flame : 
the one side by humility and obedience, the other by com- 
passion ; both by prayers and tears.”* And as he, so let 
me, “beg for peace as for life, by your filial piety to the 
church of God, whose ruins follow upon our divisions: by 
your love of God’s truth, by the graces of that one blessed 
Spirit, whereby we are all informed and quickened, by 
the precious blood of that Son of God which was shed for 
our redemption, be inclined to peace and love; and though 
our brains be different, yet let our hearts be one.”> Let 
us all endeavour, by a compliance and a comprehension, to 
promote love and charity, peace and unity, that so being 
children of peace, and obedient subjects of the Prince of 
peace, the God of peace may bless us with peace, quiet, 
and serenity here, and at the end of our days receive us 
into his eternal peace, and everlasting rest; which God 
of his infinite mercy grant may be the portion of us all, 
through the merits of his only Son our Lord and Saviour 
Jesus Christ. Amen, and amen. 


4 Passion Sermon. > Tbid. 


294 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


POSTSCRIPT. 


_ Because some practices and customs mentioned in the preceding 
treatise were not from the first plantation of Christianity, but were 
afterward introduced ; and others might not be universal, but only fol- 
lowed in some particular churches, it will not be unnecessary to adda 
table of the names, age, and country of those fathers, and of their con- 
temporaries, who have been cited by us, that so we may guess at the 
time when such customs were brought in, and know the places where 
they were chiefly practised. 





“NAMES. COUNTRIES. AGE. 
A.C. 
Several synods held in Africa between .-.--.-.--.- 250 & 
260 
Alexander, bishop of-...--- Jerusalem, St22 220bee sees 228 
Anonymus apud Euseb. lib. 

Baieap. 10; p. 1Oe, oo) TiessertAsian 0. tenn n. 170 
Anicetus, bishop of.-..-..- Rome sis. ose oh, DN Se eee 154 
The synodical letter of --.-.- the council of Antioch, held- 265 
Apollinaris, bishop of ---- -- Hierapolis, in Lesser Asia - - 170 
EMPOUGLNGS scotia ater ad oc a ree cena ee ere eee 200 
DS TU a ek Se I oe ePalestinia 22 coc ere 260 
B'S 5 CA ae ee a eee @arthiage, 5: 2122. oe ae 253 
PUPCMON onc ne ein ee eee We kee Dotan ee ee ee 196 
Babylas, bishop of. -..----- AMVIOCH, Sees sae eee 246 
ML AROADAS J. Nene oS e |i eee eke eer 50 
Basilides, the heretic. ..---- Alexandria 2234 Gees ee 134 
Basilides, a bishop in_-.-.--- Spalhyace cul eee eee 258 
elernnis ie oe are tt ee Carinae 6 atte cree 253 
Letters of the clergy of Rome |of Carthage, written between} 250 & 

tothe clergy 22.2524. 225 258 
Clemens, bishop of ....---- Rome wise cee Geet ce 70 
Clemens Gf 2.225 sa er pan! Alexandriay . 00 os gis 204 
Cornelius, bishop of... - - --- Homey... 4ee cue pees eae 252 
Crescens, bishop of....--.- Certajan Adrica.2. 22.222 258 
Cyprian, bishop of.-...-- -- CanMANe ins oh eee oe ences 250 
Dionysius, bishop of... --.- Commi: cme 2. oh. eee oe 172 
Dionysius, bishop of... --.- Alexandria t: >... cite =-\- 260 
Eusebius, a deacon of_..--- Alexdndria. 2. oo. eee. soe 259 
Fabianus, bishop of-..- -- -- Rome. Src ee ee Cee 236 


Firmilian, bishop of-....-... Caesarea, Cappadocia ...-.- 250 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


NAMES. COUNTRIES. 
Fortunatus, bishop of .....- Ibueabor), in’ Africa.’ 2. =. 
Fortunatus, aschismatico.— |in Adni¢a << 5.00 occ cine 
Gregory, bishop of. ...----- Neoresarea. <2 == seccte < 
Ignatius, bishop of......- -- Antipch.s* 33 Foa5tesuweeee 
Irenzus, bishop of.....---- Ly OnS 36 ja vec s ous sees 
PUBEUL MAGEE oo. on sa Gal 0 « AMOI: Sous a ok Soe a te 
Lucius, bishop of....--.-.- Thebeste, in Africa.......- 
A letter of the churches of 

Lyons and Vienne.....-- to the churches of Asia... .- 
Pouuens Ment 20... 2 22152. Rate sess oats chown as 
Mattialis, a bishop in...-..- ro) ELL a aR se OR ae 
Je lc £2) eee UAT i ead SATEEN 4 
Nemesianus, bishop of.... . - ‘Thubunis, in Africa. -22.-. - 
PUAN feyore Seiwa eo wl <2 5 GMCs eS otl.. aae. oe 
Origen, a presbyter of...--- Alexahdnd, 0612s ceacn. 
Palmas, bishop of....-...-- Amiastris, In Fontus= 2... 2s 
Paulus Samosatenus, bp. of | Antioch ....--..-.-.------ 
Eset Meath GN claro xeuilhs = othe eae ae Sree Pomeomains 
Polycarp, bishop of....---- DIMVIHAwoseeisa 2 ee Gee 
Polycrates, bishop of-..-...- BiGnesuss. Mab cite Gace pees 
Pontius, a deacon of.......- Carthare: 02 iis ae a te = 
Privatus, bishop of ........ Lambese, in Africa ....--.- 
Sabinus, bishop of -....---- Emerita, in Spain -....-...- 
Sedatus, bishop of.....---- Tirbo; mi Attica 25. S22 
Secundinus, bishop of--.-- - - Carpis, m Afnea ..22.-2..- 
An epistle of the church of 

Smyrna to the church of. | Philomilium....--..---.--- 
Stephen, bishop of.....--.-- Rome eee 85 88st. Soe es 
DCattaousy ott Soest tee Sytlacs-see ase Se ee 
Tertullian, a presbyter....-. of Casthage: 38 oc. 2sbse 8 
Theoctistus, bishop of... - - - Cesarea, in Palestina... --- 
Theophilus, bishop of.... .- Cesarea, in Palestina ....-- 
Victor, bishop of --...----- ROMO Jie )s. Skeeatewied os 
Victormus Petavionensis....| Hungary -.....--.------- 
Vincentius, bishop of...-..- hinaries madre soe eee. e 


Zoticus, bishop of ....--..- Comane, in Lesser Asia - -. - 


296 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


CONTENTS 
BUPERTISENENT. coc sn.6 on one See eae. A ance eeene oe Page 3 
ineyot the author ss Secs ce ee ena c eae eee Rae 9 
PREECE Se oe ck Se ee ee ees ete wna oo eA Se ee 13 
Pranitive authors. sccce: a2 woh os cece coee be wae ene Teen ere 17 
CHAPTER, 


§ 1. The various significations of the word church. § 2. A particular 


ma 


church the chief subject of the ensuing discourse: the constituent 
parts thereof twofold, viz., clergy and laity. § 3. Eachof these had 
their particular functions, and both their jot offices: three things on 
which a great part of the following discourse depends proposed to be 
handled, viz., the peculiar acts of the clergy, the peculiar acts of the 
laity, and the joint acts of them both. 44. The peculiar acts of the 
clergy propounded to be discussed according to their several orders : 
first, of the bishops: a view of the world as it was im a state of hea- 
thenism, at the first preaching of Christianity, necessary to be con- 
sidered : where the apostles planted churches, they appointed the first 
converts to be bishops thereof. § 5. But one bishop in a church: 
the orthodoxness of the faith proved from the succession of the 
bishops : the titles and relation of the bishop to his flock. -.... 19 


CHAPTER II. 


1. As but one bishop to a church, so but one church to a bishop. 
The bishop’s cure never called a diocess, but usually a parish, no 
larger than our parishes. 4 2. Demonstrated by several arguments. 
§ 3. A survey of the extent of several bishoprics, as they were in 
Ignatius’s days, as of Smyma. § 4. Ephesus. § 5. Magnesia. 
§ 6. Philadelphia. And, § 7. Trallium. § 8. The bigness of the 
diocess of Antioch. § 9. Of Rome. § 10. Of Carthage. § 11. A 
reflection on the diocess of Alexandria. § 12. Bishops in villages. 
§ 13. Allthe Christians of a diocess met together in one place every 
munday to serve God..2 2.2. ooeee see ees Shoe ee ee oe 30 


CHAPTER III. 


§ 1. What the bishop’s office was. §2. Always resident on his cure. 


ad 


§ 3. How the bishop was chosen, elected, or presented by the majority 
of the parish. § 4. Approved by the neighbouring bishops. § 5. In- 
stalled by imposition of hands. How many bishops necessary to this 
instalment. § 6. When a bishop was promoted, he certified it to 
other bishops. 4§ 7. A brief recapitulation of the peculiar acts of the 
bishops: S032 ck uslnce eeeie eey POLS ween eae es oe ae 53 


CHAPTER IV. 
1. The definition and description of a presbyter; what he was. 
§ 2. Inferior to a bishop in degree: § 3. But equal to a bishop in 
order. §4. The reason why there were many presbyters in a church. 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 297 


§ 5. Presbyters not necessary to the constitution of a church. § 6. 
WY NOH Deca ylers VEREN oe onan. 6 ne nna oon eee Page 60 


CHAPTER V. 


§ 1. The order and office of the deacons. § 2. Subdeacons, what. 
§ 3. Of acolyths, exorcists, and lectors; through those offices the 
bishops gradually ascended to their episcopal dignity. § 4. Of ordi- 
nation. First, of deacons. 4§ 5. Next, of presbyters : the candidates 
for that office presented themselves to the presbytery of the parish 
where they were ordained. § 6. By them examined about four 
qualifications, viz., their age. § 7. Their condition in the world. 
§ 8. Their conversation. § 9. And their understanding. Human 
learning needful. § 10. Some inveighed against human learning, 
but condemned by Clemens Alexandrinus. § 11. Those that were 
to be ordained presbyters generally passed through the inferior 
offices. § 12. When to be ordained, propounded to the people for 
their attestation. § 13. Ordained in, but not to a particular church. 
§ 14. Ordained by the imposition of the hands of the presbytery. 
§ 15. The conclusion of the first particular, concerning the peculiar 
acts of the clergy 82 


ee 


CHAPTER VI. 


§ 1. The peculiar acts of the laity proposed to be discoursed of. What 
were the qualifications of church membership. § 2. The people, in 
some cases, had power to depose their bishops. § 3. The conjunct 
acts of the clergy and laity proposed to be discoursed of. All eccle- 
siastical affairs were managed by their joint endeavours.....- 98 


CHAPTER VII. 


§ 1. The necessity, quality, and excellency of discipline. Six things 
propounded to be handled. 1. For what faults offenders were cen- 
sured. 2. Who were the judges that censured. 3. The manner of 
their censures. 4. What their censures were. 5. The course that 
offenders took to be absolved. 6. The manner of their absolution. 
§ 2. Censures were inflicted for all sorts of crimes, especially for idol- 
atry. §3.'The whole church were the judges that composed the 
ecclesiastical consistory. The executive power lodged in the clergy, 
and legislative both in clergy and laity. In difficult points some 
neighbouring bishops assisted at the decision of them. § 4. The 
manner of their censures. §5. Their censures consisted in excommu- 
nications and suspensions: the dreadfulness thereof. 46. ‘The course 
that offenders took to be absolved: they first lay grovelling and weep- 
ing at the church doors. § 7. Then admitted into the rank of the 
penitents. Their behaviour during their time of penance. § 8. How 
long their penance was. In some cases the fixed period anticipated ; 
when ended, the penitents were examined by the court, and if ap- 
proved, then absolved. § 9. The manner of their absolution. They 
came into the church with all expressions of sorrow, publicly con- 
fessed the sin for which they had been censured. The church was 
tenderly affected with their confession. § 10. After confession they 
were absolved by the clergy’s imposition of hands. 4 ]1. Then ad- 


298 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


mitted to the church’s peace. The clergy generally restored only to 
RPE SMMUNION < 4425 2 32pes PONE a eee Page 105 


CHAPTER VIII. 


61. Of the independency of churches. § 2. Of the dependency of 
churches. 4 3. Of synods, and the several kinds of them. § 4. How 
often synods were convened. § 5. Who were the members of 
synods. § 6. By whose authority synods were convened. §7. When 
convened, the manner of their proceedings, a moderator first chosen, 
what the moderator’s office was. § 8. Then they entered upon 
business, which had relation either to foreign churches, or their own ; 
with respect to foreign churches, their acts were only advising. 
§ 9. With respect to their own churches, obliging. The end and 
power of synods inquired into... 2 22/s..s25-.. 2084 MBPS 22. 2 127 


CHAPTER IX. 


§ 1. Of the unity of the church, of schism, defined to be a breach of that 
unity. The unity of the church, and consequently the breach of it, 
to be differently understood, according to the various significations 
of the word church. § 2. The unity of the church universal consi- 
dered negatively and positively ; negatively, it consisted not in a uni- 
formity of rites, nor in a unanimity of consent to the non-essential 
points of Christianity. The rigid imposers thereof condemned as 
cruel and tyrannical. § 3. Positively, it consisted in a harmonious 
assent to the essential articles of faith. 'The non-agreement therein 
called schism, but not the schism of the ancients. § 4. How the 
unity of a church collective was broken; this neither the schism of 
the ancients. §5.'The unity of a particular church consisted in two 
things, in the members’ love and amity each toward other, and in the 
people’s close adherence to their bishop, or parish church; the breach 
of the former sometimes called schism. 46. The breach of the latter, 
which was a causeless separation from their bishop, the schism of the 
ancients. In how many cases it was lawful for the people to separate 
from their bishop. 4 7. A separation under any other pretence what- 
soever was that which the fathers generally and principally meant by 
schism, proved so to have been. 49 8. Farther proved from Ignatius. 
§ 9. Exemplified in the schism of Felicissimus and Novatian. § 10. An 
objection answered touching the schism of Novatian. How the 
schism of one particular church affected other churches. § 11. A 
summary and conclusion of this discourse concerning schism... 141 





PANT TI: 


CHAPTER I. 


§ 1. Of the public worship of the primitive church. § 2. In their assem- 
blies they began with reading the Scriptures. Other writings read 
besides the Scriptures. § 3. Who read the Scriptures, from whence 
they were read, and how they were read. 4 4. Whether there were 
appointed lessons. § 5. After the reading of the Scriptures, there 
followed singing of psalms. § 6. What psalmsthey sung. § 7. The 


THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 299 


manner of their singing. § 8. Of singing men, and of church mu- 
sic. § 9. To singing of psalms succeeded preaching. On what 
the preacher discoursed: how long his sermon was. § 10. The 
method of theirsermons. § 11. Who preached; usually the bishop; 
or, by his permission, any other, either clergyman or layman Page 164 


CHAPTER II. 


1. After preaching, all the congregation rose up to join in public 
prayers. § 2. They prayed toward the east. Their reasons for that 
custom. 4 3. They lifted up their hands and eyes toward heaven. 
§ 4. Whether the minister that officiated wore a surplice, and therein 
of ministers’ habits. § 5. Whether they sung their prayers, and 
whether they used responsals. § 6. Of prescribed liturgies. The 
Lord’s prayer not always, but commonly used by them. § 7.-To the 
Lord’s prayer they added other prayers of their own choice or inven- 
tion, proved so to have been. § 8. Whether their prayers were 
miinoedtnto several ‘collects . 2.5 06.22 ~ oo. 4-01 258-8 sec 174 


CHAPTER III. 


§ 1. Of baptism: the persons baptizing. § 2. The persons baptized : 
first, infants. § 3. Next, adult persons. The qualifications that were 
required in them. §4. The manner of baptism: the person to be 
baptized abjured the devil, the world, and the flesh, and gave his as- 
sent to the fundamental articles of the Christian faith. 4 5. A digres- 
sion concerning the ancient creed. ‘The creed commonly called the 
apostles’, not known within the first three hundred years after Christ. 
In those days they had other brief summaries of faith, agreeing in 
sense, but not in words. § 6. All the ancient creeds transcribed in 
their original language. §7.'The creed, commonly called the apostles’, 
compared with ancient creeds. § 8. How the creed was composed 195 


CHAPTER IV. 


§ 1. Of godfathers. § 2. Exorcism preceded baptism: the form and 
reason thereof. § 3. Next came baptism itself: the sacramental 
water consecrated by prayer. § 4. The person baptized in the name 
of the Trinity. 45. Immersion or dipping generally used. § 6. Some- 
times perfusion, or sprinkling. The validity thereof considered. 
9.7. After baptism followed prayers.....-.--...-..-,---2 202 213 


CHAPTER V. 


§ 1. After baptism followed chrismation, or unction. § 2. Then sign-: 
ation, er signing with the sign of the cross. §3. Then imposition 
of hands, or confirmation. § 4. Their reasons for unction. § 5. For 
signation. § 6. For imposition of hands. § 7. Confirmation imme- 
diately followed baptism. § 8. Presbyters confirmed as well as 
bishops. § 9. Confirmation reiterated. .....-..-...--..--.- 223 


CHAPTER VI. 


§ 1. Of the Lord’s supper. The time when administered. § 2. Persons 
that received it. None present at the celebration thereof besides the 
communicants. §3. The manner of its celebration. In some places 
the communicants first made their offerings. § 4. The minister began 


or 


300 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


with a sacramental discourse, or exhortation: then followed a prayer, 
consisting of petitions and praises, which consecrated both the ele- 
ments at once. § 5. After that the words of the institution were 
read. §6. Then the bread was broken, and the wine poured out, 
and both distributed. Diversity of customs m the manner of the dis- 
tribution. § 7. The posture of receiving. § 8. After they had com- 
municated, they sung a psalm, and then concluded with prayer, and a 
collection for the poor... ...........- .. ee =< Page 241 


CHAPTER VIE. 


§ 1. Of the circumstances of public worship. § 2. Of the place there- 
of. In times of peace fixed places for that end, metonymically called 
churches. § 3. How those churches were built. § 4. No holiness 
in those places. §5. Of the time of public worship. 4 6. The first 
day of the week a usual time. § 7. Celebrated with joyfulness, es- 
teemed holy, and spent ina holy manner. 4 8. Their reasons for the 
observation of this day. §9. The usual title of this day, “The 
Lord’s day.” § 10. Sometimes called Sunday, but never the sab- 
bath day. § 11. Saturday, another time of public worship --.. 251 


CHAPTER VIII. 


§ 1. Of the primitive fasts, two-fold, occasional and fixed. Of occasional 
fasts, what they were, and by whom appointed. § 2. Of fixed fasts, 
two-fold, weekly and annual. Wednesdays and Fridays weekly fasts ; 
till what time of the day observed, and why observed. § 3. One ne- 
cessary annual fast, viz., Lent. Why they fasted at Lent, and how 
long it lasted. §4. Of the manner of their fasts. Three sorts of 
fasts, viz., Statio, Jejunium, and Superpositio. What those several 
kinds were, and at what times observed ........------.----- 260 


CHAPTER IX. 


§ 1. Of the primitive feasts, two-fold, occasional and fixed. § 2. Of 
Easter. § 3. Of Whit-Sunday. §4. Of Christmas. On what day 
of the year Christ was born. § 5. Of Epiphany. § 6. Besides these 
no other feasts In commemoration of Christ, the Virgin Mary, or the 
apostles. ‘The apostles not called saints in the primitive writings. 
§ 7. Festivals in commemoration of the martyrs. Observed on the 
annual day of their martyrdom. Persons appointed to take an exact 
account of the day of their decease. § 8. Why those festivals were 
observed. ‘The day of the martyr’s death termed their birth-days. 
§ 9. Where these festivals were solemnized. Of the burying-place 
of the ancients. § 10. Manner of the observation of these festivals 268 


CHAPTER X. 


§ 1. Of the rites and ceremonies : the difference between them. § 2. Of 
ceremonies: many used by the ancients, which through various ways 
crept into the church. § 3. Of rites: every church followed its own 
rites without imposing them on any other. § 4. The members of 
every church obliged to observe the rites of that church where they 
lived. § 5. The conclusion of this inquiry, with an earnest persua- 
sion to peace, unity, and moderation.....-..-----....------ 278 


en GtER NUNES RE | de cule ac ce eetne cnde msed nee temer 294 











ch Bg 
inary Libraries 


Ti 





1 2 0118 


Oo 
a 
Ss 





'e ’ 
+ i 
5 ; 
(= fx 


: 
aa 2 
i @ 


® 


@ 








| 

i ND UMass rae iets 
PLE; ae ah retere iy : 

vTHann HTT 


i 
i 
Hil 
Wa 
| 
Hh} 
tt 





